^^  OF  P«/.^ 


A 


C6V 


( 


AN  EXPOSITION 


SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  THE  CORINTHIANS. 


ur 


CHARLES  IIODGE,  D.D., 

PROFESSOR   IN   THE   THEOLOGICAL   SEMIXART,    PRIN'CETON,    N.  J. 


NEW  YORK : 
ROBERT  CARTER  AND  BROTHERS 

BROADWAY. 

1872. 


Entkbeo  according  to  act  of  Cougress,  in  the  year  1859,  by 

EGBERT  CAETER  &  BEOTIIEES, 

la  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Sout'aeni  Distilol 

of  New  York. 


II.   CORINTHIANS. 


CHAPTER  I. 


The  Salutation,  vs.  1.  2.  Thanksgiving  to  God  for  the  deliverance  and  con- 
olation  which  the  writer  had  experienced,  vs.  3-11.  Defence  of  himself 
gainst  the  charge  of  inconstancy  and  inconsistency,  vs.  12-24. 

PauPs  gratitude  for  the  deliverance  and  consolation  ichich  he 
had  experie7iced.     Ys.  1-11. 

After  the  apostle  had  written  his  former  letter  to  the  Cor- 
inthians, and  had  sent  Titus,  either  as  the  bearer  of  the  letter 
or  immediately  after  its  having  been  sent  by  other  hands,  to 
ascertain  the  effect  which  it  produced,  he  seems  to  have  been 
in  a  state  of  unusual  depression  and.  anxiety.  The  persecu- 
tions to  which  he  had  been  exposed  in  Asia  placed  him  in 
continued  danger  of  death,  1,  8;  and  his  solicitude  about  the 
church  in  Corinth  allowed  him  no  inward  peace,  7,  5.  After 
leaving  Ephesus  he  went  to  Troas ;  but  although  the  most 
j)romising  prospects  of  usefulness  there  presented  themselves, 
he  could  not  rest,  but  passed  over  into  Macedonia  in  hopes  of 
meeting  Titus  and  obtaining  from  him  intelhgence  from  Cor- 
inth, 2,  12.  23.  This  letter  is  the  outpouring  of  his  heart  oc- 
casioned by  the  information  which  he  received.  More  than 
any  other  of  Paul's  epistles,  it  bears  the  impress  of  the  strong- 
feelings  under  the  influence  of  which  it  was  written.  That 
the  Corinthians  had  received  his  former  letter  with  a  proper 
spirit,  that  it  brought  them  to  repentance,  led  them  to  ex- 
communicate the  incestuous  person,  and  called  forth,  on  the 


2  II.   CORINTHIAlSrS   1. 

part  of  the  larger  portion  of  the  congregation,  the  manifesta- 
tion of  the  warmest  affection  for  the  apostle,  relieved  his 
mind  from  a  load  of  anxiety,  and  filled  his  heart  with  grati 
tude  to  God.  On  the  other  hand,  the  increased  boldness  and 
infiaence  of  the  filse  teachers,  the  perverting  errors  which 
tliey  inculcated,  and  the  frivolous  and  calumnious  charges 
which  they  brought  against  himself,  filled  him  with  indigna- 
tion. This  accounts  for  the  abrupt  transitions  from  one  sub- 
ject to  another,  the  sudden  changes  of  tone  and  manner  which 
characterize  this  epistle.  When  writing  to  the  Corinthians  as 
a  church  obedient,  affectionate,  and  penitent,  there  is  no  limit 
to  his  tenderness  and  love.  His  great  desire  seems  to  be  to 
heal  the  temporary  breach  which  had  occurred  between  them, 
and  to  assure  his  readers  that  all  was  forgiven  and  forgotten, 
and  that  his  heart  was  entirely  theirs.  But  Avhen  he  tarns  to 
the  wicked,  designing  corrupters  of  the  truth  among  them, 
there  is  a  tone  of  severity  to  be  found  in  no  other  of  his  writ- 
ings, not  even  in  his  epistle  to  the  Galatians.  Erasmus  com- 
pares this  epistle  to  a  river  which  sometimes  flows  in  a  gentle 
stream,  sometimes  rushes  down  as  a  torrent  bearing  all  before 
it ;  sometimes  spreading  out  like  a  placid  lake ;  sometimes 
losing  itself,  as  it  were,  in  the  sand,  and  breaking  out  in 
its  fulness  in  some  unexpected  place.  Though  perhaps  the 
least  methodical  of  Paul's  writings,  it  is  among  the  most  in- 
teresting of  his  letters  as  bringing  out  the  man  before  the 
reader  and  revealing  his  intimate  relations  to  the  people  for 
whom  he  laboured.  The  remark  must  be  borne  in  mind 
(often  made  before),  that  the  full  play  allowed  to  the  peculi- 
arities of  mind  and  feeling  of  the  sacred  writers,  is  in  no  way 
inconsistent  Avith  their  plenary  inspiration.  The  grace  of 
God  in  conversion  does  not  change  the  natural  character  of 
its  subjects,  but  accommodates  itself  to  all  their  peculiarities 
of  disposition  and  temperament.  And  the  same  is  true  with 
regard  to  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  in  inspiration.     ^ 

The  salutation  in  this  epistle  is  nearly  in  the  same  words 
as  in  the  former  letter,  vs.  1.  2.  Here  also  as  there,  the  intro- 
duction is  a  thanksgiving.  As  these  expressions  of  gratitude 
are  not  mere  forms,  but  genuine  effusions  of  the  heart,  they 
vary  according  to  the  circumstances  under  which  each  epistle 
was  written.  Ilere  the  thanksgiving  was  for  consolation. 
Paul  blesses  God  as  the  God  of  all  mercy  for  the  consolation 
whicli  he  had  experienced.  He  associates,  or  rather  identitiea 
himself  with  the  Corinthians ;  representing  his  attiictions  an 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  1.2.  g 

theirs  and  his  consolation  also  as  belonging  to  them,  vs.  3-7. 
He  rcfei-s  to  the  afflictions  which  came  upon  hhn  in  Asia,  so 
that  he  despaired  of  life,  but  through  their  prayers  God  who 
had  dehvered,  still  delivered,  and  he  was  assured,  would  con- 
tinue to  dehver  him,  vs.  8-11. 

1.  2.  Paul,  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ  by  the 
will  of  God,  and  Timothy  (oui-)  brother,  unto  the 
church  of  God  which  is  at  Corinth,  with  all  the  saints 
which  are  in  all  Achaia :  Grace  (be)  to  you,  and  peace, 
from  God  our  Father,  and  (from)  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

The  sense  in  which  the  word  apostle  is  to  be  here  taken, 
the  force  of  the  expression  bi/  the  icill  of  God,  the  scriptural 
meaning  of  the  words  ehurch  and  saints,  are  all  stated  in  the 
remarks  on  the  first  verse  of  the  former  epistle.  In  the  first 
epistle  Paul  associates  Sosthenes  with  himself  in  the  saluta- 
tion ;  here  it  is  Timothy  who  is  mentioned.  In  neither  case 
is  there  any  community  of  office  or  authority  implied.  On 
the  contrary,  a  marked  distinction  is  made  between  Paul  the 
apostle  and  Sosthenes  or  Timothy  the  brother,  i.  e.  the  Chris- 
tian companion  of  the  apostle.  From  1  Cor.  4,  1 7  it  appears 
that  Timothy  was  in  Macedonia,  on  his  way  to  Corinth,  when 
the  first  epistle  was  written.  From  the  form  of  expression 
(if  Timothy  come)  in  1  Cor.  16,  10,  and  from  the  absence  of 
any  intimation  m  this  epistle  that  Paul  had  received  from  him 
the  information  from  Corinth  which  he  was  so  desirous  to  ob- 
tain, it  is  doubtful  Avhether  Timothy  had  been  able  to  reach 
that  city.  At  any  rate  he  was  now  with  the  apostle  at  Ni- 
copolis  or  some  other  city  in  Macedonia.  With  all  the  saints 
which  are  in  all  Achaia.  This  epistle  was  not  intended  ex- 
clusively for  the  Christians  in  Corinth,  but  also  for  all  the  be- 
lievers scattered  through  the  province  who  were  connected 
with  the  church  in  Corinth.  These  believers  were  probably 
not  collected  into  separate  congregations,  otherwise  the  apos- 
tle would  have  used  the  plural  form,  as  when  writing  to  the 
churches  of  Galatia,  Gal.  1,  3.  Achaia  was  originally  the 
name  of  the  northern  part  of  the  Peloponnesus  including  Cor- 
inth and  its  isthmus.  Augustus  divided  the  whole  country 
into  the  two  provinces,  Macedonia  and  Achaia;  the  former 
included  Macedonia  proper,  Illyricum,  Epu'us  and  Thessaly; 


4  II.   CORINTHIAI^S   1,  2.  3. 

and  the  latter  all  the  southern  part  of  Greece.  It  is  in  this 
wide  sense  Achaia  is  always  used  in  the  New  Testament. 
From  this  it  appears  that  the  converts  to  Christianity  in 
Greece  were  at  this  time  very  few  out  of  Corinth,  as  they 
were  all  members  of  the  church  in  that  city.  •  Grace  and 
peace,  the  favour  of  God  and  its  fruits,  comprehend  all  the 
benefits  of  redenijDtion.  The  apostle's  prayer  is  not  only  that 
believers  may  be  the  objects  of  the  love  of  God  our  Father 
and  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  but  that  they  may  have  the 
assurance  of  that  love.  He  knew  that  the  sense  of  the  love 
of  God  would  keep  their  hearts  in  perfect  peace.  God  is  our 
Father,  Jesus  Christ  is  our  Lord.  Every  one  feels  the  dis- 
tinction in  this  relationship,  whether  he  reduces  it  to  clear 
conceptions  in  his  own  mind  or  not.  God,  as  God,  is  our 
father  because  he  is  the  father  of  all  spirits,  and  because,  if 
believers,  we  are  born  again  by  his  Spirit,  and  adopted  as  his 
children,  made  the  objects  of  liis  love  and  the  heirs  of  his 
kingdom.  Jesus  Christ,  the  eternal  Son  of  God  clothed  m 
our  nature,  is  our  Lord,  for  two  reasons :  first,  because  as 
God  he  is  our  absolute  sovereign ;  and  secondly,  because  as 
Redeemer  he  has  purchased  us  by  his  own  most  precious 
blood.  To  him,  therefore,  as  God  and  Redeemer,  our  alle- 
giance as  Christians  is  specially  due. 

3.  Blessed  (be)  God,  even  the  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Father  of  mercies,  and  God  of  all 
comfort. 

This  richness  and  variety  of  designations  for  the  object  of 
his  reverence  and  gratitude,  shows  how  full  was  the  apostle's 
heart,  and  how  it  yearned  after  fellow.-hip  with  God,  to  whom 
he  i^laces  himself  in  every  possible  connection  by  thus  multi- 
plying the  terms  expressive  of  the  relations  which  God  bears 
to  his  redeemed  people.  Blessed,  The  word  (.vkoyy^ro^ 
{blessed)  is  used  in  the  New  Testament  only  of  God.  (In 
Luke  1,  28,  where  the  Virgin  Mary  is  spoken  of,  evXoyrjixivr)  is 
used.)  It  expresses  at  once  gratitude  and  adoration.  Adored 
be  God !  is  the  expression  of  the  highest  veneration  and 
thankfuhiess.  It  is  not  God  merely  as  God,  but  as  the  Father 
of  oar  Lord  Jesus  Christ  who  is  the  object  of  the  apostle's 
adoration  and  gratitude.  The  expression  does  not  refer  to 
the  miraculous  concej^tion  of  our  Lord,  but  the  person  ad- 
dressed is  he  whose  eternal  Son  assumed  our  nature,  who,  as 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  4.  5 

invested  vnth  that  nature,  is  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  he 
who  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son, 
that  whoso  believeth  in  him  might  not  perish  but  have 
everlasting  life.  It  is  therefore  the  pecuUar,  characteristic 
Christian  designation  of  God,  as  it  presents  him  as  the  God 
of  redemption.  Rom.  ]o,  6.  2  Cor.  11,  31.  Col.  1,  3.  I  Pet.  1,  3. 
This  God  who  has  revealed  himself  as  the  God  of  love  in 
sending  his  Son  for  our  redemption,  the  apostle  still  further 
designates  as  the  Father  of  mercies^  i.  e.  the  most  merciful 
Father ;  he  whose  characteristic  is  mercy.  Comp.  Ps.  86,  5.  15. 
Dan.  9,  9.  Micah  7,  18.  The  explanation  which  makes  the 
expression  mean  the  author  of  mercies  is  inconsistent  with  the 
signification  of  the  word  otKTLpfxosj  which  always  means  mercy 
as  a  feeling.  The  God  of  all  comfort.  This  most  merciful 
Father  is  the  God,  i.  e.  the  author  of  all,  i.  e.  of  all  possible, 
consolation.  God  is  the  author  of  consolation  not  only  by 
delivering  us  from  evil,  or  by  ordering  our  external  circum- 
stances, but  also,  and  chiefly,  by  his  inward  influence  on  the 
mind  itself,  assuaging  its  tumults  and  filling  it  ^ith  joy  and 
peace  in  believing.    Rom.  15,  13. 


4.  Who  comforteth  us  in  all  our  tribulation,  that 
we  may  be  able  to  comfort  them  which  are  in  any 
trouble,  by  the  comfort  where^\ith  we  ourselves  are 
comforted  of  God. 

Us  here  refers  to  the  apostle  himself.  Throughout  this 
chapter  he  is  speaking  of  his  own  personal  trials  and  consola- 
tions. He  blessed  God  as  the  author  of  comfort,  because  he 
had  experienced  his  consolations.  And  the  design,  he  adds, 
of  God  in  afliicting  and  in  consoling  was  to  qualify  him  for 
the  oflSce  of  a  consoler  of  the  alflicted.  In  this  design  Paul 
acquiesced ;  he  was  willing  to  be  thus  afflicted  in  order  to  be 
the  bearer  of  consolation  to  others.  A  life  of  ease  is  com- 
monly stagnant.  It  is  those  who  sufier  much  and  who  expe- 
rience much  of  the  comfort  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  live 
much.  Their  life  is  rich  m  experience  and  in  resources.  In 
all  our  tribalation^  i.  e.  on  account  of  (eTrt).  His  tribulation 
was  the  ground  or  reason  why  God  comforted  him.  The 
apostle  was  one  of  the  most  afflicted  of  men.  He  suflTered 
from  hunger,  cold,  nakedness,  stripes,  imprisonment,  from 
porils  by  sea  and  land,  from  robbers,  from  the  Jews,  from  the 


6  II.   CORINTHIAE^S   1,5. 

heathen,  so  that  his  life  was  a  continued  death,  or,  as  he  ex- 
pressed it,  he  died  daily.  Besides  these  external  afflictions 
he  Mas  overwhelmed  with  cares  and  anxiety  for  the  churches. 
And  as  though  all  this  were  not  enough,  he  had  "  a  thorn  in 
the  flesh,  a  messenger  of  Satan^"  to  buffet  him.  See  11,  24-30, 
and  12,  7.  In  the  midst  of  all  these  trials  God  not  only  sus- 
tained him,  but  filled  him  with  such  a  heroic  spirit  that  he 
actually  rejoiced  in  being  thus  afflicted.  "  I  take  pleasure," 
lie  says,  "  in  infirmities,  in  reproaches,  in  necessities,  in  perse- 
cutions, in  distresses  for  Christ's  sake ;  for  when  I  am  weak, 
then  am  I  strong,"  12,  10.  This  state  of  mind  can  be  experi- 
enced only  by  those  who  are  so  filled  with  the  love  of  Christ, 
that  they  rejoice  in  every  thing,  however  painful  to  them- 
selves, whereby  his  glory  is  promoted.  And  where  this  state 
of  mind  exists,  no  afflictions  can  equal  the  consolations  by 
which  they  are  attended,  and  therefore  the  apostle  adds,  that 
he  was  enabled  to  comfort  those  who  were  in  any  kind  of 
affliction  by  the  comfort  wherewith  he  was  comforted  of  God. 

5.  For  as  the  sufferings  of  Christ  abound  in  us,  so 
our  consolation  aboundeth  by  Christ. 

This  is  a  confirmation  of  what  precedes.  'We  are  able  to 
comfort  others,  for  our  consolations  are  equal  to  our  suffer- 
ings.' The  sufferings  of  Christ,  do  not  mean  'sufferings 
on  account  of  Christ,'  which  the  force  of  the  genitive  case 
does  not  admit ;  nor  sufferings  which  Christ  endures  in  his 
own  members;  but  such  sufferings  as  Christ  suffered,  and 
which  his  people  are  called  upon  to  endure  in  virtue  of 
their  union  with  him  and  in  order  to  be  like  him.  Our  Lord 
said  to  his  disciples,  "  Ye  shall  indeed  drink  of  my  cup,  and 
be  baptized  with  the  baptism  wherewith  I  am  baptized  with," 
Matt.  20,  23.  Paul  speaks  of  his  felloiKship,  or  participation 
in  the  suffermgs  of  Christ,  Phil.  3,  10 ;  and  the  apostle  Peter 
calls  upon  believers  to  rejoice,  inasmuch  as  they  are  "  par- 
takers of  Christ's  sufferings,"  1  Peter  4,  24.  Comp.  Rom.  8, 
17.  Col.  1,  24.  Gal.  6,  17.  In  many  other  passages  it  is  taught 
that  believers  must  share  in  the  sufferings,  if  they  are  to  be 
partakers  of  the  glory  of  Christ.  /S*o,  i.  e.  in  equal  measure, 
our  consolation  aboundeth  through  Christ.  As  union  with 
Christ  was  the  source  of  the  afflictions  which  Paul  endured, 
so  it  was  the  source  of  the  abundant  consolation  which  he  en- 
joyed.    Tliis  makes  the  great  difterence  between  the  sorrowi 


II.   CORINTHIANS   J    6.  1.  1 

of  believers  and  those  of  unbelievers.  Alienation  from  Chi'ist 
does  not  secure  freedom  from  suffering,  but  it  cuts  us  off 
from  the  only  source  of  consolation.  Therefore  the  sorrow 
of  the  world  w^orketh  death. 


6,  7.  And  whether  we  be  afflicted,  (it  is)  for  your 
consolation  and  salvation,  which  is  effectual  to  the  en- 
during of  the  same  sufferings  which  we  also  suffer :  or 
whether  we  be  comforted,  (it  is)  for  your  consolation 
and  salvation.  And  our  hope  of  you  (is)  stedfast, 
knowing  that  as  ye  are  partakers  of  the  sufferings,  so 
(shall  ye  be)  also  of  i\\e  consolation. 

Although  the  ancient  manuscripts  differ  very  much  in  the 
order  in  w^hich  the  several  clauses  of  these  verses  are  ar- 
ranged, yet  the  sense  expressed  in  all  is  substantially  the 
same.  The  text  adopted  by  Beza,  Griesbach,  Knapp,  3Ieyer, 
&c.,  on  the  authority  of  the  manuscripts  A,  C,  and  several  of 
the  ancient  versions,  reads  thus,  "  Whether  we  be  afflicted, 
(it  is)  for  your  consolation  and  salvation  ;  whether  we  are 
comforted,  (it  is)  for  your  consolation,  which  is  effectual  in 
enduring  the  same  sufferings  which  we  also  suffer ;  and  our 
hope  of  you  is  stedfast,  knowing  that  as  ye  are  partakers  of 
the  suffering,  so  also  (shall  ye  be)  of  the  consolation."  The 
reading  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Riickert  and  oth- 
ers, differs  from  the  common  text  in  placing  the  clause  our 
hope  of  yoxi  is  stedfast^  immediately  after  the  iirst  member 
of  the  sentence,  and  before  the  words,  ichether  we  are  com- 
forted. For  this  arrangement  are  the  MSS.  B,  D,  E,  F,  G,  I. 
The  reading  of  Beza  gives  the  text  in  its  simplest  and  most 
perspicuous  form.  In  either  way  the  main  idea  is,  '  Whether 
we  be  afflicted,  it  is  for  your  good ;  or  whether  we  be  com- 
forted, it  is  for  your  good.'  All  the  rest  is  subordinate.  The 
relation  in  which  the  apostle  stood  to  the  Corinthians  w\as 
such  that  he  felt  assured  that  they  would  share  both  in  his 
sufferings  and  in  his  consolation,  and  therefore  experience 
the  benefit  of  both.  It  was  not  that  Paul's  constancy  in  suf- 
fering set  them  a  good  example ;  nor  simply  that  Paul  suf- 
fered in  behalf  of  the  Gospel,  and  therefore  for  the  benefit  of 
others ;  nor  does  he  mean  merely  that  the  experience  of  the 
Coi'inthians  would  correspond  to  his,  if  they  were  similarly 
1* 


8  II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  Q.I. 

afflicted,  they  would  be  similarly  comforted;  but  the  main 
idea  is  that  such  was  the  intimate  bond  between  them  and 
him  that  he  had  a  firm  hope  they  would  be  partakers  both  of 
his  affliction  and  of  his  consolation.  Though  this  appears  to 
be  the  primary  idea  of  the  passage,  the  others  are  not  to  be 
excluded.  Paul  no  doubt  felt,  and  intended  to  intimate,  that 
his  diversified  experience  would  redound  to  their  advantage 
by  qualifying  him  more  abundantly  for  his  work,  and  especial- 
ly for  the  office  of  consoling  them  in  the  afflictions  which  they, 
as  well  as  he,  would  be  called  to  endure.  Whether  we  be  af- 
flicted (it  is)  for  your  consolation  and  salvation  j  i.  e.  my 
afflictions  will  contribute  to  your  consolation  and  salvation. 
To  the  former,  because  those  whom  God  afflicts,  or,  who  suf- 
fer for  Christ's  sake  and  with  Christ's  people,  God  never  fails 
to  console ;  to  the  latter,  because  suffering  and  salvation  are 
so  intimately  connected.  "  If  we  suffer  with  him  we  shall  also 
be  glorified  together,"  Rom.  8, 17.  It  is  not  of  suffering  as 
suffering  that  the  apostle  here  speaks.  There  is  no  tendency 
in  pain  to  produce  holiness.  It  is  only  of  Christian  suffering 
and  of  the  sufferings  of  Christians,  that  is,  of  suffering  endured 
for  Christ  and  in  a  Christian  manner,  that  the  apostle  says  it 
is  connected  with  salvation,  or  that  it  tends  to  work  out  for 
those  ^v\lo  sufter  an  eternal  weight  of  glory.  Or  whether  ice 
be  comforted  it  is  for  your  consolation.  That  is,  our  consola- 
tion is  also  yours.  If  we  are  consoled,  so  are  you.  If  we  suf- 
fer together,  we  rejoice  together.  Or,  if  you  suffer  as  I  do, 
you  will  enjoy  similar  consolation.  My  being  consoled  ena- 
bles me  to  console  you.  According  to  the  common  text  the 
reading  here  is,  "  your  consolation  and  saliKition?''  But  the 
repetition  of  the  words  and  salivation  is  not  sustained  by  some 
of  the  oldest  manuscripts,  and  they  do  not  cohere  so  well  with 
the  following  clause ;  as  it  can  hardly  be  said  that  "  salva- 
tion is  effectual  in  enduring  affliction."  On  these  grounds,  as 
before  remarked,  Beza  and  many  other  editors  omit  the  words 
in  question.  Which  is  effectual ;  that  is,  which  consolation 
is  operative  or  efficacious,  not  to  the  enduring,  as  in  our  ver- 
sion, but  in  the  enduring  {kv  viroixovrj).  This  consolation 
kIiows  its  efficacy  in  the  patient  endurance  of  suffering.  Ac- 
cording to  another  interpretation  evepyou/xcVT^s  is  taken  passive- 
ly, lohich  is  icrought  out.  The  sense  would  then  be  good, 
'This  consolation  is  wrought  out  or  experienced  in  patient 
endurance.'  But  as  Paul  always  uses  this  word  actively,  the 
rendering  adopted  in  our  version  is  generally  and  properly 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  8.  9 

preferred.  The  same  sufferings  which  I  also  suffer.  The 
sufferings  of  the  Corinthians  were  the  same  with  those  cf  the 
apostle,  because  they  sympathized  in  his  afflictions,  because 
they  in  a  measure  suffered  as  he  did,  and  because  their  siiffer- 
iugs  were  "  the  sufferings  of  Christ,"  in  the  same  sense  that 
his  were.  They  were  not  only  such  sufferings  as  Christ  en-  \ 
dured,  but  they  were  incurred  because  those  who  suffered 
were  Christians.  And  our  hope  of  you  is  stedfast.  That  is, 
'  we  have  a  stedfast  hope  that  you  will  be  partakers  of  our 
consolation.'  Knowing^  i.  e.  because  we  know,  that  as  ye  are 
partakers  of  the  sufferings^  so  also  of  the  consolation.  The 
two  go  together.  Those  who  share  in  our  sorrows,  share  in 
our  joys.  There  are  two  ideas  apparently  united  here  as  in 
the  preceding  context.  The  one  is  that  the  sufferings  of  the 
apostle  were  also  the  sufferings  of  the  Corinthians  because  of 
the  union  between  them.  The  other  is,  that  his  readers  were 
in  their  measure  exposed  to  the  same  kind  of  sufferings.  In 
this  twofold  sense  they  were  the  Koivinvot^  the  communicants 
or  joint-j)artakers  of  his  joys  and  sorrows. 

8.  For  we  would  not,  brethren,  have  you  ignorant 
of  our  trouble,  which  came  to  us  in  Asia,  that  we  were 
pressed  out  of  measure,  above  strength,  insomuch  that 
we  despaired  even  of  life. 

The  apostle  confirms  from  the  facts  of  his  recent  history, 
what  he  had  said  of  his  afflictions.  Asia  is  probably  to  be 
understood  here  in  reference  to  proconsular  Asia,  which  com- 
prehended the  western  provinces  of  Asia  Minor,  viz.,  Mysia, 
Lydia,  Caria,  and  part  of  Phrygia.  What  afflictions  and  dan- 
gers the  apostle  here  refers  to  is  uncertain.  It  is  generally 
assumed  that  he  alludes  to  the  uproar  in  Ephesus,  of  which 
mention  is  made  in  Acts  19,  23-41.  But  to  this  it  is  objected 
that  Paul  does  not  appear  to  have  been  in  personal  danger 
during  that  tumult ;  that  instead  of  saying  in  Asia  he  would 
probably  have  said  in  Ephesus^  had  he  referred  to  that  special 
event ;  and  that  the  language  used  seems  obviously  to  imply 
a  succession  and  continuance  of  severe  trials.  Others  think 
that  the  reference  is  to  some  severe  illness.  But  there  is 
nothing  in  the  context  to  indicate  that  particular  form  of  af 
fliction.  Neither  could  illness  naturally  be  included  under 
the  "  afflictions  of  Christ,"  under  which  head  the  apostle  com 


to  II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  9. 

preheods  all  the  afflictions  to  which  in  this  connection  he  ro* 
tors.  The  jDrobability  is  that  he  alludes  to  trials  of  difierent 
kinds,  and  especially  to  plots  and  attempts  against  his  life. 
He  was  surrounded  by  enemies,  Jews  and  heathen,  who  thirst- 
ed for  his  blood.  And  we  know,  as  remarked  above,  that  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  contains  the  record  of  only  a  small  por- 
tion of  his  afflictions.  That  ive  were  jjj^essed,  ifSapij'^rjixiv,  we 
7cere  burdened.  The  allusion  is  to  a  wearied  animal  that  sinks 
in  despair  under  a  burden  beyoiid  its  strength.  Out  of  meas- 
iire^  above  strength  ^  if  thus  separated,  the  former  of  these 
phrases  refers  to  the  character  of  his  afflictions  in  themselves, 
'  they  were  excessive ; '  and  the  latter,  expresses  their  relation 
to  his  ability  to  bear  them.  Absolutely,  they  were  too  great, 
relatively,  they  were  above  his  strength.  Many  commenta- 
tors make  the  former  qualify  the  latter,  "  We  were  burdened 
far  beyond  our  strength"  (Ka^'  vTrcpfSoXyjv  virep  Swa/Atv).  Inso- 
much that  loe  despaired  even  of  life.  The  expression  is  in- 
tensive, i^airoprj^rjvai^  to  be  Utterly  at  a  loss,  or,  absolutely 
without  a  way  {-nropos)  of  escape.  It  seemed  impossible  to  the 
apostle  that  he  could  escape  from  the  enemies  who  beset  him 
on  every  side.  These  enemies  were  not  only  men,  but  perils 
and  trials  of  all  kinds. 


9.  But  we  had  the  sentence  of  death  in  ourselves, 
that  we  should  not  trust  in  ourselves,  but  in  God  who 
raiseth  the  dead. 

So  far  from  expecting  to  live,  the  apostle  says,  on  the  con- 
trary (ttAA-ci)  he  had  in  himself  the  sentence  of  death.  This 
may  mean  that  he  was  as  one  who  was  actually  condemned  to 
die.  God  appeared  to  have  passed  upon  him  the  sentence  of 
death,  from  which  there  could  be  no  reprieve.  This  supposes 
oLTTOKpiixa  to  have  the  sense  of  KaraKpLfxa,  This  meaning  of  the 
word  is  very  doubtful.  It  i)roperly  signifies  response,  answer. 
'  We  had  hi  ourselves  the  answer  of  death.'  That  is,  Avlien  he 
put  to  himself  the  question,  whether  life  or  death  was  to  be 
the  issue  of  his  conilicts,  tlie  answer  was,  Death !  In  other 
words,  he  did  not  expect  to  escai)e  with  his  life.  God  brought 
him  into  these  straits  In  order  that  he  might  not  trust  in  him- 
self, but  in  God  who  raiseth  the  dead.  Tiiese  two  things  are 
so  connected  that  the  former  is  the  necessary  condition  of  the 
latter.     There  is  no  such  thing  as  implicit  contidence  or  reli- 


II.  CORINTHIANS   1,  10.11.  li 

ance  on  God,  until  we  renounce  all  confidence  in  oui-seli. 
When  Paul  was  convinced  that  no  wisdom  nor  efforts  of  his 
own  could  deliver  him  from  death,  then  he  was  forced  to  rely 
on  the  power  of  God.  God  is  here  described  as  he  who  rais- 
eth  the  deacl^  because  the  apostle's  deliverance  was  a  deliver- 
ance from  death.  It  was  only  that  Being  who  could  call 
the  dead  to  life  who  could  rescue  him  from  the  imminent  peril 
in  which  he  was  placed.  So  when  Abraham's  faith  was  put 
to  the  severe  trial  of  believing  what  was  apparently  impossi- 
ble,  it  is  said,  "  He  beheved  God  who  quickeneth  the  dead, 
and  calleth  those  things  whic;h  be  not  as  though  they  were," 
Rom.  4,  17.  Comp.  Heb.  11,  19.  No  man  until  he  is  tried 
knows  how  essential  the  omnipotence  of  God  is  as  a  ground 
of  confidence  to  his  people.  They  are  often  placed  in  circum- 
stances where  nothing  short  of  an  almighty  helper  can  give 
them  peace. 

10.  Who  delivered  us  from  so  great  a  death,  and 
doth  deUver  :  in  whom  Ave  trust  that  he  will  yet  de- 
liver (us). 

Paul's  trust  in  God  was  not  disappointed.  He  did  deliver 
him  from  such  a  deaths  i.  e.  one  so  fearful  and  apparently  so 
inevitable.  It  is  evident  from  the  whole  context  that  the 
apostle  had  not  only  been  in  imminent  peril,  but  exposed  to  a 
more  than  ordinarily  painful  death.  Whether  this  was  from 
disease  or  from  enemies  is  a  matter  of  conjecture.  The  latter 
is  the  more  probable.  Though  he  had  been  delivered  from 
the  instant  and  fearful  death  with  which  he  was  threatened, 
the  danger  was  not  over.  The  machinations  of  his  enemies 
followed  him  wherever  he  went.  He  therefore  says  that  God 
had  not  only  delivered,  but  that  he  continued  to  deliver  him. 
He  was  stiU  beset  with  danger.  He  was  however  confident 
for  the  future.  For  he  adds,  in  ichoni  we  trusty  ei?  ov  rjXTriKaixev, 
on  ichom  ice  have  j^lciced  our  hope  that  he  icill  also  henceforth 
deliver.  He  did,  he  does,  he  will,  deliver,  Ippva-aro,  pverm, 
pva-iTai.  The  experience  of  past  deliverances  and  mercies  is 
the  ground  of  present  peace  and  of  confidence  for  the  future. 
These  words  of  Paul  sound  continually  in  the  ears  of  the  peo- 
ple of  God  in  all  times  of  emergency. 

11.  Ye  also  helping  together  by  prayer  for  us,  thai 


12  II.   CORINTHIANS   1    11. 

for  the  gift  (bestowed)  upon  us  by  the  means  of  many 
persons,  thanks  may  be  given  by  many  on  our  behalf. 

Intercessory   prayer   has   great    power,    otherwise    Paul 
would  not  so  often  solicit  it  on  his  own  behalf,  and  enjoin  the 
duty  on  his  readers.     His  confidence  in  his  safety  for  the  fu- 
ture was  not  founded  simply  on  the  experience  of  God's  past 
mercy,  but  also  on  the  prayers  of  Christians  in  his  behalf. 
God  will  yet  deliver  me,  he  says,  you  also  helping  together  by 
prayer.     That  is,  provided  you  join  your  prayers  with  those 
of  others  for  my  safety.     Helping  together  probably  refers  to 
their  co-operation   in    the    work  of  intercession   with   other 
churches,  rather  than  with  the  apostle  himself.     The  design 
of  God  in  thus  uniting  his  people  in  praying  for  each  other 
when  in  affliction  or  danger,  is  that  the  deliverance  may  be 
matter  of  common  gratulation  and  praise.     Thus  all  hearts 
are  drawn  out  to  God  and  Christian  fellowship  is  promoted. 
This  is  expressed  in  the  latter  part  of  this  verse ;  that^  i.  e.  in 
order  that  the  gift  being  bestowed  on  us  by  means  of  many 
(Slo.  TToXXuiv)  thanks  may  be  rendered  by  many  (e/<  iroXkoiv). 
In  the  Greek  it  is  e/c  tto/VXojv  Trpoo-wTrwv,  which  most  commenta- 
tors render  as  our  translators  do,   by  many  pei'sons.     The 
word  irpbaoiTTov^  however,  always  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment means  face  or  presence^  which  sense  many  retain  here. 
'  That  thanks  may  be  rendered  from  many  (upturned)  laces.' 
According  to  the  interpretation  given  above,  the  words  h\a 
TToXkiov  are  connected  with  to  x^P'-o'/^a,,  "  the  favour  to  us  by 
means  of  many ; "   and  €k  ttoXXiov  Trpya-wTrcoi/  with   evxapecr.^7/, 
'thanks  may  be  rendered  by  many  persons  (or  faces).'     This 
gives  a  good  sense,  and  is  perhaps  better  suited  to  the  force 
of  the  prepositions  c/c  and  8ta.     It  is  more  correct  to  say  that 
the  '  favour  was  (Sta)  by  means  of  many,'  i.  e.  by  means  of 
their  prayer,  than  that  it  '  was  (e/c)  out  of  or  ^y,'  as  express- 
ing the  efficient  cause.     The  order  of  the  clauses,  however, 
favours  the  connection  adojjted  by  our  translators.     '  The  fa- 
vour was  by  many  persons,  and  the  thanks  to  be  rendered  by 
means  of  many.'      This  construction  of  the  sentence  is  also 
sanctioned  by  the  majority  of  commentators. 

The  aj^ostys   defence   against   the   charge  of  inconstancy 
Vs.  12-24. 

Paul  had  informed  the  Corinthians  that  it  was  his  purpose 


II.   CORIXTHIANS   1,  12.  13 

to  go  direct  from  Ephesus  to  Corinth,  thence  into  Macedonia, 
and  back  again  to  Corinth,  v.  16.  This  plan  he  had  been  in- 
duced to  modify  before  the  former  epistle  was  sent,  as  in 
1  Cor.  16,  5  he  tells  them  he  would  not  visit  them  mitil  he 
had  passed  through  Macedonia.  On  this  slight  ground  his 
enemies  in  Corinth  represented  him  as  saying  one  thing  and 
meaning  another.  They  seem  also  to  have  made  this  an  oc- 
casion for  charging  him  with  like  inconsistency  in  doctrine. 
If  his  word  could  not  be  depended  on  in  small  matters,  what 
dependence  could  be  placed  on  his  preaching  ?  Paul  shows 
there  was  no  levity  or  insincerity  involved  in  this  change  of 
his  plans,  and  no  inconsistency  in  his  preaching ;  but  that  to 
spare  them  he  had  deferred  his  visit  to  Corinth,  vs.  12-24. 


12.  For  our  rejoicing  is  this,  the  testimony  of  our 
conscience,  that  in  simpHcity  and  godly  sincerity,  not 
in  fleshly  wisdom,  but  by  the  grace  of  God,  we  have 
had  our  conversation  in  the  world,  and  more  abundant- 
ly to  you- ward. 

The  connection  between  this  verse  and  what  precedes,  as 
indicated  by  the  particle  for,  is,  '  I  look  for  your  sympathy  in 
my  afflictions,  and  for  your  prayers  in  my  behalf,  for  my  con- 
science bears  testimony  to  the  simplicity  and  sincerity  of  my 
conversation  among  you.'  Unless  we  are  conscious  of  integri- 
ty towards  others,  v/e  cannot  be  assured  of  their  confidence  in 
us.  Our  rejoicmf/,  says  Paul,  is  this,  the  testimony  of  our 
conscience.  This  may  mean  that  the  testimony  of  conscience 
was  the  ground  of  hi%  rejoicing.  This  assumes  a  metonymical 
sense  of  the  Kavxq(Ti<i,  a  meaning  which  is  often  attributed  to 
the  word.  But  as  the  word  may  express  the  inward  feeling 
of  exultation  as  well  as  the  out^^ard  expression  of  it,  which 
latter  is  its  proper  sense,  the  meaning  may  be  (mthout  assum- 
ing any  metonomy),  'My  joyful  confidence  consists  in  the 
consciousness  of  smcerity.'  The  testimony  of  the  conscience 
is  consciousness ;  and  that  of  which  Paul  was  conscious  was 
integrity.  And  that  consciousness  sustained  and  elevated 
him.  It  was  in  its  nature  a  joy.  What  follows  is  explanato- 
ry. His  conscience  testiiied  that  in  simplicity  and  godly  sin^ 
cerity,  &c.  The  word  a7rAoT?^s  means  singleness  of  mind,  the 
opposite  of  duplicity.     The  ancient  manuscripts  A,  B,  C,  read 


U  II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  12. 

aytoTT;?,  purity  or  sanctity^  which  the  recent  editors  generally 
adopt.  The  former  word  is  much  more  common  in  Paul's 
v/ritings,  and  is  better  suited  to  the  following  terra,  ciXtKptVeia, 
which  means  transliicence^  clearness,  sincerity  of  mind.  It  is 
called  the  sincerity  of  God^  which  our  translators  explain  as 
meaning  godly  sincerity,  either  in  the  sense  of  religious,  as 
distinguished  from  mere  natural  sincerity  as  a  moral  virtue ; 
or  in  the  sense  of  divine^  what  comes  from  God.  The  latter 
is  the  true  explanation.  It  is  the  sincerity  which  God  gives. 
The  Bible  often  uses  such  expressions  as  "  the  peace  of  God," 
"joy  of  the  Spirit,"  &c.,  meaning  the  peace  or  joy  of  which 
God  or  the  Spirit  is  the  author.  There  is  a  specific  difference 
between  moral  virtues  and  spiritual  graces,  although  they  are 
called  by  the  same  names.  Simplicity,  sincerity,  meekness, 
long-suffering,  when  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit  differ  from  the 
moral  virtues  designated  by  those  terms,  as  many  external 
things,  though  similar  in  appearance,  often  differ  in  their  in- 
ward nature.  A  religious  man  and  a  moral  man  may  be  very 
much  alike  in  the  eyes  of  men,  though  the  inward  life  of  the 
latter  is  human,  and  that  of  the  former  is  divine.  What  Paul 
means  here  to  say  is,  that  the  virtues  which  distinguished  his 
deportment  in  Corinth  were  not  merely  forms  of  his  own  ex- 
cellence, but  forms  of  the  divine  life ;  modes  in  which  the 
Spirit  of  God  which  dwelt  in  him  manifested  itself.  This  is 
expressed  more  clearly  in  what  follows,  yot  hi  fleshly  wis- 
dom,  that  is,  not  in  that  wisdom  which  has  its  origin  in  our 
own  nature.  The  familiar  meaning  of  the  word  flesh  in  the 
New  Testament,  especially  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul,  is  hu- 
man nature  as  it  now  is,  as  listing uished  from  the  Spirit  of 
God.  "  Ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,"  says  this  apostle,  "  but  in 
the  Spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you,"  Rom. 
8,  9.  As  our  nature  is  corrupt,  natural  or  fleshly  necessarily 
involves  more  or  less  the  idea  of  corruption.  The  natural 
man,  carnal  mind,  fleshly  wsdom,  all  imply  that  idea  more  or 
less,  according  to  the  context,  l^leshly  toisdoni^  therefore,  is 
that  kind  of  wisdom  which  unrenewed  men  are  wont  to  ex- 
hibit, wisdom  guided  by  principles  of  self-interest  or  ex})cdi- 
ency.  It  stands  opposed  to  the  grace  of  God.  Paul  was  not 
guided  by  the  former,  but  by  the  latter.  The  grace  of"  God 
controlled  his  conduct ;  and  by  grace  is  here  meant,  as  so 
often  elsewhere,  the  gracious  influences  of  the  Spirit.  We 
have  had  our  conversation  j  di/carTpd<^i7/xev,  we  moved  about,  we 
oonducted  ourselves.     The  expression  includes  all  the  raani- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  13.14.  15 

festations  of  his  inward  life.  In  the  worlds  i.  e.  amon<^  men 
generally;  and  more  especially  to  you-icard.  That  is,  the 
evidence  of  my  sincerity  is  much  more  abundant  to  you  than 
to  others.  The  Corinthians  had  enjoyed  more  opportunities 
of  learning  the  character  of  the  apostle,  and  of  seeing  his  sim- 
plicity and  integrity,  than  the  world,  or  men  outside  of  the 
church,  had  possessed.  He  could  therefore  the  more  confi 
dently  assume  that  they  confided  in  him. 


13.  14.  For  we  write  none  other  things  unto  you, 
than  what  ye  read  or  acknowledge,  and  I  trust  ye  shall 
acknoAvledge  even  to  the  end;  as  also  ye  have  ac- 
knowledged us  in  part,  that  we  are  your  rejoicing, 
even  as  ye  also  (are)  ours  in  the  day  of  the  Lord 
Jesus. 


The  same  sincerity  and  honesty  marked  his  correspond- 
ence that  characterized  his  life.  He  never  wrote  one  thing 
and  meant  another.  The  connection  with  the  preceding  verse 
is,  'We  are  perfectly  honest, /or  we  write  none  other  things 
than  what  ye  read.'  The  simple,  obvious  meaning  of  my  let- 
ter, is  the  true  meaning.  I  write,  i.  e.  I  mean  none  other 
things  than  what  you  understand  me  to  intend  when  you 
read  my  letters,  or  k?ioia  from  other  sources.  The  word 
€7nyLvwaK€T€  may  be  rendered  as  in  our  version,  ye  acJcnowl- 
edge.  The  sense  would  then  be,  '  I  mean  nothing  else  but 
what  you  read  or  acknowledge  to  be  my  meaning.'  But  this 
is  not  so  clear.  The  design  of  the  apostle  is  to  show  that  his 
purposes  really  were  what  his  letters  indicated,  or  what  the 
Corinthians,  by  other  means,  had  been  led  to  understand  them 
to  be.  The  words  are,  "  Ye  read,  or  also  (rj  koI)  know,"  and 
I  trust  ye  shall  acknowledge  to  the  end.  This  clause  may  be 
connected  -with  what  precedes.  '  I  mean  w^hat  you  know,  and 
I  trust  shall  continue  to  acknowledge,  to  be  my  meaning.' 
That  is,  '  I  have  confidence  that  you  will  not  misunderstand 
or  misinterpret  my  intentions  until  w^  all  come  to  the  end  ; ' 
€0)5  Te'Aovs,  to  the  end,  either  of  life,  or  of  the  world.  A  much 
better  sense  is  obtained  by  connecting  this  clause  with  what 
follows,  so  that  the  clause  (ort  Kavxil^"-  V^'^  ia-fxev),  that  we  are 
your  rejoicing,  is  the  object  of  the  verb  (eTnyrwcrco-^e)  ye  shalC 


16  II.    COIIIKTIIIAXS    1,  15.16. 

acknowledge.  'I  trust  ye  shall  acknowledge  unto  tLe  end 
(as  ye  have  acknowledged  us  m  part),  that  we  are  your  re- 
joicing.' The  verb  err tytvcoo-Keiv  combines  the  ideas  of  recog- 
nition and  of  complete  knowledge.  The  words  in  part  are 
most  naturally  referred  to  the  Corinthians,  ye  in  pai't^  i.  e.  a 
part  of  you.  Paul  knew  that  there  w^ere  some  in  Corinth 
who  did  not  rejoice  in  him.  Others  understand  them  to 
qualify  the  verb.  It  was  only  a  partial  recognition  of  him 
that  the  Corinthians  had  as  yet  manifested.  Compare  1  Cor. 
13,  12,  "I  know  in  part."  This,  however,  would  give  a  tone 
of  reproach  to  the  language  w^hich  is  foreign  to  the  charac- 
ter of  the  passage.  We  are  your  rejoicing^  i.  e.  the  ground 
of  your  exultation  and  delight.  As  ye  also  ours^  in  the  day 
of  the  Lord:  Jesus.  Paul  believed  that  in  the  day  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  the  Corinthians  would  rejoice  over  him  as  he  would  re- 
joice over  them.  In  that  day  they  would  appreciate  the 
blessedness  of  having  had  him  for  their  teacher,  as  he  would 
rejoice  in  having  had  them  for  his  converts.  The  joy,  how- 
ever, which  he  anticipated  in  its  fuhiess  when  Christ  should 
come,  was  in  a  measure  already  theirs.  'We  are,  and  shall 
be,  your  rejoicing,  as  ye  are  and  shall  be  ours,  in  the  day  of 
the  Lord  Jesus.'  Instead  of  rendering  on  in  the  above  clause 
that  many  commentators  render  it  because.  This  gives  a  dif- 
ferent sense  to  the  whole  passage.  '  We  hope  you  will  ac- 
knowledge— because  we  are  your  rejoicing,  as  ye  are  ours.' 
This,  however,  leaves  the  verb  acknoioledge  without  an  object. 
What  were  they  to  acknowledge  ?  We  may  indeed  supply 
from  the  context  the  words  our  sincerity^  but  it  is  more  natural 
so  to  construe  the  passage  as  to  avoid  the  necessity  of  supply- 
ing any  thing.  The  sense  also  is  better  according  to  the  com- 
mon interpretation.  Paul  does  not  design  to  prove  that  the 
Corinthians  confided  in  him  because  he  was  their  rejoicing, 
which  would  be  to  prove  a  thing  by  itself. 


15.  16.  And  in  this  confidence  I  was  minded  to 
come  to  you  before  that  ye  might  have  a  second  bene- 
fit ;  to  pass  by  you  into  Macedonia,  and  to  come  again 
out  of  Macedonia  unto  you,  and  of  you  to  be  brought 
on  iny  way  to  Judea. 

And  in  this  confidence^  that  is,  in  the  confidence  that  we 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  17.  11 

are  your  rejoicing,  Paul  was  not  afraid  to  go  to  Cormth. 
He  did  not  doubt  that  the  great  majority  of  the  church  would 
receive  him  with  confidence  and  affection.  The  change  in  the 
plan  of  his  journey  arose,  as  he  afterwards  states,  from  very 
different  motives.  Paul  says  he  loas  mmded,  i.  e.  intended  to 
come  to  them  before,  i.  e.  before  going  to  Macedonia  ;  that  ye 
might  have  a  second  benefit,  i.  e.  the  benefit  of  seeing  me 
twice,  once  before  going  to  Macedonia,  and  again  after  my 
return.  The  other  explanation  of  this  passage  is,  that  second 
here  refers  to  his  first  visit  to  Corinth.  The  first  benefit  was 
their  conversion,  the  second  would  be  the  good  effects  to  be 
anticipated  from  another  visit.  But  it  appears  from  12,  14 
and  other  passages  that  Paul  had  already  been  twice  in 
Corinth,  and  therefore  he  could  not  speak  of  his  intended 
visit  as  the  second;  and  the  word  second  here  evidently 
refers  to  the  word  before.  He  was  to  see  them  before  and 
after  going  to  Macedonia.  Benefit,  x^P^^->  ^''^^e,  a  term 
generally  in  the  New  Testament  used  of  religious  blessings. 
The  word  sometimes  signifies  Joy,  so  the  sense  here  may 
be,  'That  ye  might  have  the  pleasure  of  seeing  me  twice.' 
The  former  explanation  is  not  only  better  suited  to  the  com- 
mon use  of  the  word,  but  also  gives  a  higher  sense.  A?id 
of  you  to  be  brought  07i  my  icay  to  Judea.  UpoTre/xS^vai, 
to  be  brought  on  my  way,  i.  e.  to  be  aided  in  my  journey. 
The  word  often,  and  perhaps  most  frequently,  means  to  escort 
on  a  journey,  or  to  furnish  with  the  means  of  travelling. 
Acts  15,  3.  20,  38.  &c.  In  ancient  times  when  there  were  no 
estabhshed  modes  of  travelling,  it  was  customary  for  the 
fiiends  of  the  traveller  in  one  city  to  send  him  forward  to  the 
next,  or  at  least  to  escort  him  on  his  way.  This  ofiice  of 
friendship  Paul  was  willing  and  desirous  to  receive  at  the 
hands  of  the  Corinthians.  He  was  not  alienated  from  them. 
And  his  purpose  to  seek  this  kindness  from  them  was  a  proof 
of  his  confidence  in  their  affection  for  him. 

17.  When  therefore  I  was  thus  minded  did  I  nse 
lightness  ?  or  the  things  that  I  pm-pose,  do  I  purpose 
according  to  the  flesh,  that  with  nie  there  should  be 
yea,  yea,  and  nay,  nay  ? 

Paul  did  not  execute  the  plan  of  his  journey  above  indi- 
cated.     His  having  changed  his  purpose  was  made  the  ground 


18  II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  17. 

of  a  twofold  charge  against  him  ;  first,  of  levity,  and  secondly, 
of  inconsistency  ;  saying  one  thing,  and  doing  another ;  or 
saying  one  thing  at  one  time,  and  the  opposite  at  another,  so 
that  he  was  utterly  untrustworthy  either  as  a  man  or  as  a 
teacher.  This  was  indeed  a  slight  foundation  on  which  to 
rest  such  a  charge.  It  is  no  wonder  therefore  that  it  excited 
the  apostle's  indignation.  The  first  charge  is  that  he  used 
lightness^  i.  e.  that  in  purposing  to  visit  Corinth  and  in  an- 
nouncing his  purpose  he  had  no  serious  intention  of  doing 
what  he  promised.  It  was  a  careless,  inconsiderate  avowal 
such  as  none  but  a  man  of  levity  would  make.  In  the  Greek 
the  article  is  used  {tyj  kXa<^pia)  the  lightness,  which  may  mean, 
the  lightness  with  which  they  charged  him ;  or  that  which 
belongs  to  our  nature ;  or  it  may  have  no  more  force  than 
when  used  in  other  cases  before  abstract  nouns.  Or  the  things 
that  I  inirpose^  do  I  purpose  according  to  the  flesh  f  The 
first  charge  related  to  the  past,  did  I  use  lightness?  This 
relates  to  his  general  character.  '  Am  I  habitually  governed 
in  my  plans  by  the  flesh,'  i.  e.  am  I  influenced  and  controlled 
by  those  considerations  which  govern  ordinary  men,  Avho  have 
nothing  to  guide  them  but  their  own  corrujDt  nature  ?  The 
woi-d  flesh  here,  as  in  v.  12,  stands  for  our  whole  nature,  con- 
sidered as  distinguished  from  the  Spirit  of  God.  All  who  are 
not  spiritual  (governed  by  the  Spirit)  are,  according  to  the 
Scripture,  carnal  (governed  by  the  flesh).  What  Paul  there- 
fore intends  to  deny  in  these  two  questions,  is  that  his  original 
purpose  of  visiting  Corinth  was  formed  in  levity,  and  second- 
ly, that  his  plans  in  general  were  controlled  by  worldly  or 
selfish  considerations.  That  with  me  there  should  he  yea^  yea^ 
and  nay^  nay.  That  (tVa)  hei-e  expresses  the  result,  not  the 
design.  'Do  I  so  act  after  the  flesh  that  the  consequence 
is,'  &c.  The  repetition  of  the  particles  yea^  yea^  and  ??,ay,  nay, 
is  simply  intensive,  as  in  "Matthew  5,  37,  "Let  your  communi- 
cation be  yea,  yea,  and  nay,  nay."  The  meaning,  therefore, 
is,  '  Do  I  afiirm  and  deny  the  same  thing  ?  Do  I  say  both 
yes  and  no  at  the  same  time  and  in  reference  to  the  same 
bubject  ?  Is  no  dependence  to  be  placed  on  my  word  ?  '  This 
is  the  common  interpretation  and  the  one  demanded  by  the 
context.  Many  commentators  from  Chrysostom  downwards 
give  a  very  ditterent  view  of  the  passage.  They  understand 
the  apostle  to  defend  himself  for  his  change  of  i)lan  by  saying 
that  he  was  not  like  men  of  the  world  who  obstinately  ad- 
her(;d  to  their  purposes,  without  regard  to  the  manifested  will 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  18.  19 

of  God,  so  that  with  him  a  yea  should  be  yea,  and  a  nay,  nay, 
let  what  would  be  the  consequence.  But  in  the  18th  v.  this 
interpretation  is  impossible,  because  it  is  there  simply  "  yea 
and  nay."  That  verse  therefore  determines  the  meaning  of 
this.  Besides,  what  he  goes  on  to  defend  himself  against  is 
not  a  charge  of  obstinacy,  but  of  saying  first  one  thing  and 
then  another.  Luther's  translation  assumes  still  another  in- 
terpretation. "Are  my  purposes  carnal?  jSfot  so,  but  my 
yea  is  yea,  and  my  nay  is  nay."  But  this  arbitrarily  intro- 
duces into  the  text  what  is  not  expressed,  and  thus  changes 
the  whole  sense. 


18.  But  as  God  is  true,  our  word  towards  you  was 
not  yea  and  nay. 

That  is,  '  My  preaching,  or  the  doctrine  which  I  preached, 
was  not  inconsistent  and  contradictory.  I  did  not  preach  first 
one  thing  and  then  another.'  This  sudden  transition  from  the 
question  as  to  his  veracity  as  a  man  to  his  consistency  as  a 
preacher,  shows  two  things;  first,  that  his  enemies  had 
brought  both  charges  against  him,  founding  the  latter  on  the 
former ;  and  secondly,  that  Paul  was  much  more  concerned 
for  the  gospel  than  for  his  own  reputation.  They  might  ac- 
cuse him,  if  they  pleased,  of  breaking  his  word;  but  when 
they  charged  him  with  denying  Christ,  that  was  a  very  difier- 
ent  affair.  He  therefore  drops  the  first  charge  and  turns  ab- 
ruptly to  the  second.  '  Whatever  you  may  think  of  my  ve- 
racity as  a  man,  as  God  is  true,  my  preaching  was  not  yea  and 
nay,'  i.  e.  unworthy  of  confidence.  As  God  is  true.  The 
words  are,  God  is  faithful,  that,  &q.  Comp.  1  Cor.  1,  9.  10, 
13.  1  Thess.  5,  24.  They  may  be  understood  as  an  appeal  to 
the  fidelity  of  God  as  the  ground  and  evidence  of  the  truth 
and  reliableness  of  his  preaching.  '  God  is  fiiithful,  that  our 
preaching  is  not  yea  and  nay.'  That  is,  his  fidehty  secures 
the  trustworthiness  of  the  gospel.  It  is  his  word  and  there- 
fore is  unchangeably  true.  It  abideth  forever.  '  If,'  says  the 
apostle,  '  there  is  no  dependence  to  be  placed  on  my  word, 
God  is  trustworthy.  My  preaching,  winch  is  his  word,  is  to 
be  relied  upon.  That  is  not  yea  and  nay,  but  firm  and  true.' 
It  must  be  admitted,  however,  that  this  interpretation  is  con- 
strained; it  is  not  the  simple  meaning  of  the  words.  The 
passage  must  be  paraphrased  to  get  this  sense  out  of  it.     It  is 


20  II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  18 


perhaps  better  with  our  translators,  after  Calvin,  Beza,  and 
many  other  commentators,  ancient  and  modern,  to  take  the 
words  as  an  asseveration.  So  true  as  God  is  faithful^  so  true 
is  it,  that^  <fcc.  Comp.  11,  10,  tanv  17  aXrj^^La  Xptcrro{!  ev  e/xot, 
OTL.  'Rom.  14,  11,  ^aj  eyw — ort,  as  I  live — every  knee  shall  how 
to  me.  Judith  12,  4,  ^7/  17  ^'^Xl  ^°^ — ^^'•*  I*  is  therefore  ac- 
cording to  the  usage  of  the  language  to  understand  Trtcrros  o 
«^eos — ort  as  an  oath,  and  the  sense  given  is  much  more  natu- 
ral. An  oath  is  an  act  of  worship.  To  predict  that  men  shall 
everywhere  swear  by  the  name  of  Jehovah,  Is.  65,  16,  is  to 
predict  that  Jehovah  shall  everywhere  be  worshipped.  Men 
may,  therefore,  appeal  to  God  for  the  truth  of  what  they  say 
on  any  solemn  occasion,  if  they  do  it  devoutly  as  an  act  of 
worship.  It  is  a  formal  recognition  of  his  being,  of  his  om- 
niscience, of  his  holiness  and  power,  and  of  his  moral  govern- 
ment. Our  Lord  himself  did  not  refuse  to  answer  when  put 
upon  his  oath,  Matt.  27,  63 ;  and  the  apostles  often  call  on 
God  to  Avitness  the  truth  of  their  declarations.  When,  there- 
fore, our  Saviour  commands  us,  "  Swear  not  at  all,"  he  must 
be  understood  to  forbid  profane  sweai-ing,  that  is,  calling  on 
God  in  an  irreverent  manner  and  on  trivial  occasions.  That 
our  word  toioards  you  was  not  yea  and  nay  j  6  X6yo<i  rifxdv. 
This  may  mean  ou?'  preaching^  1  Cor.  1,  17.  2,  1.  4,  and  often; 
or,  our  word  generally,  i.  e.  Avhat  I  said.  The  apostle  may  be 
understood  to  assert  the  truth  and  consistency  of  his  instruc- 
tions as  a  teacher,  or  the  trustworthiness  of  his  declarations 
and  promises  as  a  man.  The  decision  depends  on  the  context. 
In  favour  of  the  latter  it  is  urged  that  the  charge  against  him, 
as  intimated  in  v.  17,  was  that  of  breaking  his  promise,  and 
therefore  to  make  this  verse  refer  to  his  preaching  is  to  make 
him  evade  the  point  entirely.  But  the  following  verses,  which 
are  intimately  connected  with  the  one  before  us,  clearly  refer 
to  matters  of  doctrine,  and  therefore  this  verse  must  have  the 
same  reference.  The  sudden  transition  from  the  charge  of 
levity  in  v.  17,  to  that  of  false  doctrine  in  v.  18,  as  l)efore  re- 
marked, is  sufficiently  accounted  for  from  the  association  of 
the  two  charges  in  the  minds  of  his  enemies.  They  said  he 
was  not  to  be  depended  upon  as  a  preacher,  because  he  had 
ejhown  himself  to  be  untrustworthy  as  a  man.  "  As  God  is 
true,  my  preaching  is  true."  The  one  is  as  true  as  the  other. 
H(!nce  in  Gal.  1,  8  he  pronounces  an  angel  accursed  should  lio 
preach  another  gospel.  Paul's  confidence  in  the  truth  of  tho 
gospel  as  he  preached  it  was  one  and  the  same  with  his  confi* 


II.   CORINTHIANS    1,  19.  21 

dence  in  God.  To  tell  him  that  his  preaching  was  not  to  be 
depended  upon,  was  in  his  mind  the  same  as  to  say  that  God 
was  not  to  be  beheved ;  for  he  knew  that  he  was  the  infallible 
organ  of  God  in  all  his  teaching.     1  John  5,  10. 

19.  Por  the  Son  of  God,  Jesus  Christ,  who  was 
preached  among  you  by  us,  (even)  by  me  and  Silvanus 
and  Timotheus,  was  not  yea  and  nay,  but  in  him  was  yea. 

My  preaching  is  true,  for  Christ  is  true.  There  is  no  con- 
tradiction, no  yea  and  nay,  in  him,  therefore  there  is  no  con- 
tradiction in  my  doctrine.  There  was  no  room  in  Paul's  mind 
for  doubt  as  to  his  preaching  being  a  trustworthy  exhibition 
of  the  person  and  work  of  Christ,  and  therefore  if  Christ  be 
one  and  the  same,  i.  e.  self-consistent  truth,  so  was  his  doc- 
trine or  teaching.  With  such  self-evidencing  light  and  irre- 
sistible con\dction  does  the  Spirit  attend  his  communications 
to  the  human  mind.  Even  in  ordinary  religious  experience, 
the  testimony  of  the  Spirit  becomes  the  testimony  of  conscious- 
ness. Much  more  was  this  the  case  when  plenary  mspiration 
was  combined  with  the  sanctifying  power  of  the  truth.  The 
JSo7i  of  God,  Jesus  Christ;  that  is,  Christ,  who  is  the  Son  of 
God,  the  same  in  nature  vriih  the  eternal  Father,  and  because 
he  is  the  Son,  and,  therefore,  eternally  and  immutably  true, 
was  not  yea  and  nay.  There  was  nothing  in  him  contradicto- 
ry or  untrustworthy.  This  Christ  %(^as  preached  in  Corinth 
by  Paul,  Silvanus  and  Timotheus.  These  persons  are  men- 
tioned because  the  apostle  j^robably  refers  to  his  first  visit  to 
Corinth  when  they  were  his  companions.  Acts  18,  5.  His 
appeal  is  to  the  experience  of  his  readers.  They  had  found 
Christ  to  be  the  way,  the  truth  and  the  life.  He  had  been 
made  unto  them  wisdom,  righteousness,  sanctification  and  re- 
demption. 1  Cor.  1,  32.  By  Christ  here  the  apostle  does 
not  mean  the  doctrine  of  Christ.  He  does  not  intend  to  as- 
sert simply  that  there  was  perfect  consistency  in  his  own 
preaching,  and  that  it  agreed  with  the  preaching  of  his  associ- 
ates. The  truth  asserted  is  that  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  had 
not  been  manifested  among  them,  or  experienced  by  them  to 
be  unsatisfying  or  uncertain,  but  in  him  icas  yea.  That  is, 
he  was  simple  truth.  In  him,  i.  e.  in  Christ,  was  truth.  He 
proved  himself  to  be  aU  that  was  affirmed  of  him.  He  was 
and  continued  to  be  (yeyovev)  all  that  they  had  been  led  to 


22  II.   CORINTHIANS    1,  20. 

expect.  Let,  therefore,  what  will  become  of  me  and  of  my 
reputation  for  veracity,  Christ  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day, 
and  forever. 

20.  For  all  the  promises  of  God  in  him  are  yea, 
and  in  him  amen,  unto  the  glory  of  God  by  us. 

This  verse  is  the  confirmation  of  what  precedes.  Christ 
Avas,  and  is,  not  yea  and  nay,  not  uncertain  and  inconsistent, 
for  m  him  all  the  promises  of  God  were  fulfilled.  All  that 
God  had  promised  relative  to  the  salvation  of  man  met  its  full 
accomplishment  in  him.  Instead  of,  all  the  promises,  the 
Greek  is,  as  many  pi^omises.  That  is,  as  many  promises  as 
had  from  the  beginning  been  made  as  to  what  the  Messiah 
was  to  be  and  to  do.  In  hhn  were  the  yea.  That  is,  in  him 
they  found  their  affirmation  or  accomplishment.  The  article 
{to  vai),  the  yea,  has  reference  to  the  promises.  Christ,  as  re- 
gards the  promises  of  God,  was  the  yea,  i.  e.  their  affirmation 
and  accomplishment.  And  in  him.  the  Amen.  This  is  say- 
ing in  Hebrew  what  had  just  been  said  in  Greek;  Amen  be- 
ing equivalent  to  yea.  It  is  not  unusual  with  the  sacred 
writers  to  give  solemn  or  impressive  formulas  in  both  lan- 
guages. The  i^romises  of  God  are  amen  in  Christ,  because  he 
is  the  sum  and  substance  of  them.  He  says  in  a  sense  whicli 
includes  the  idea  here  expressed,  "I  am  the  truth,"  John  14, 
6 ;  and  in  Rev.  3,  7  he  is  designated  as  "  He  that  is  true ; " 
and  in  Rev.  3,  14  he  is  called,  "The  Amen,  the  faithful  and 
true  witness."  The  common  text,  which  is  expressed  in  our 
version,  has  the  support  of  the  manuscripts  D,  E,  I,  K,  which 
read  kox  Iv  avrw,  and  in  him.  A,  B,  C,  F,  G  have  ^ib  koI  Si 
avTov,  wherefore  also  through  him  the  Amen.  This  reading, 
which  most  recent  editions  adopt,  was  preferred  by  Calvin, 
who  renders  the  passage,  quare  et  per  ipsiun  sit  Amen.  The 
Vulgate  has  the  same  reading,  ideo  et  per  ipsvm  Amen.  The 
sense  thus  expressed  is  certainly  better  ancl  fuller.  The  vers9 
then  teaches  not  only  that  the  promises  of  God  receive  their 
confirmation  in  Clirist,  but  also  that  we  experience  and  assent 
to  their  truth.  We  say  Amen,  it  is  even  so,  to  all  God  luid 
promised,  when  we  come  to  know  Christ.  To  the  glory  of 
God  by  us.  As  these  words  are  commonly  pointed  the  natu- 
ral interpretation  is,  that  by  us,  i.  e.  by  the  preaching  of  the 
apostles,  men  are  brought  thus  to  say  Amen  co  the  divine 
promises,  to  the  glory  of  God.     God  is  glorified  by  the  faith 


II.    CORINTHIANS    1,  21.22.  23 

m  liis  promises  thus  expressed.  The  words,  however,  admit 
of  a  ditFerent  construction.  By  us  may  be  connected  "\vith 
the  first  part  of  the  clause.  '  The  Amen  is  said  by  us  to  the 
glory  of  God.'  This  may  mean,  '  We  Christians  render  a  glad 
assent  to  the  promises  thus  ratified  in  Christ.'  But  us  m  the 
immediate  context  refers  to  the  apostles,  and  therefore  cannot 
be  naturally  here  made  to  refer  to  Christians  generally.  Or, 
the  meaning  may  be,  '  By  us  apostles  testimony  is  given  to  the 
truth  of  the  promises,  to  the  glory  of  God.'  This  last-men- 
tioned interpretation,  however,  is  inconsistent  with  the  scrip- 
tural use  of  the  expression  "  to  say  Amen,''  which  means'  sim- 
ply to  assent  to,  or  to  sanction.  1  Cor.  14,  16.  The  apostles 
did  not  say  Amen  to  the  promises  by  preaching  the  gospel ; 
but  through  their  preaching  men  were  brought  to  say  Amen ; 
that  is,  they  were  led  to  the  joyful  experience  and  avowal  of 
faith  in  what  God  had  promised.  In  Christ,  therefore,  the 
promises  were  fulfilled ;  and  in  him  also  men  were  brought, 
through  the  apostles,  joyfully  to  assent  to  them.  Bengel's 
pithy  comment  on  this  verse  is  :  JVae  respectu  Dei  promitten- 
tis,  amen  respectu  credentium.  "  He  that  hath  received  his 
testimony,  hath  set  to  his  seal  that  God  is  true."  John  3,  33. 
1  John  5,  9. 10.  To  receive  God's  testimony  concerning  his 
Son,  to  say  Amen,  and  to  believe,  all  mean  the  same  thing. 

21.  22.  Now  he  which  stabUsheth  us  with  you  in 
Christ,  and  hath  anointed  us,  (is)  God ;  who  hath  also 
sealed  us,  and  given  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit  in  our 
hearts. 

In  the  preceding  verse  the  apostle  had  spoken  of  Christ  as 
the  truth  and  substance  of  all  the  divine  promises,  and  of  the 
cordial  assent  which  behevers  gave  to  those  promises ;  he  here 
brings  into  view  God  as  the  author  and  preserver  of  their 
faith,  who  would  assuredly  grant  them  the  salvation  of  which 
he  had  already  given  them  the  foretaste  and  the  pledge.  N'oio 
ne ;  or,  but  he  who  stabUsheth  us  xoith  you  in  Christ.  The 
word  is  o  /SefSai'M'^  loho  renders  firm  or  stedfast ;  i.  e.  who 
causes  us  with  you  to  stand  firm,  ets  Xptorov,  in  reference  to 
Christ,  so  that  we  adhere  to  him  with  unshaken  constancy. 
As  ^v^y  the  pronouns  we  and  us^  in  what  precedes,  the  apostlo 
had  meant  himself  and  Silas  and  Timothy,  here  where  he  has 


24  II.    CORIXTIIIANS    1,21.22. 

reference  to  all  believei-s  he  unites  tliera  with  himself,  us  with 
you.  The  constancy  in  faith  which  God  gave  was  not  a  gift 
peculiar  to  teachers,  but  common  to  all  true  Christians.  A7id 
hath  anointed  us.  Kings,  prophets,  and  jmests  were  anointed 
when  inaugurated  in  their  several  offices  ;  to  anoint  may  there- 
fore mean  to  qualify  by  divine  influence,  and  thereby  to  au- 
thorize any  one  to  discharge  the  duties  of  any  office.  In 
Luke  4, 18  our  Lord  applies  to  himself  the  language  of  Isaiah 
61,  I,  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me,  because  he  hath 
anointed  me  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  poor."  Acts  4,  27. 
10,38.  "God  anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy 
Ghost."  In  like  manner  Christians  are  sj)oken  of  as  anointed, 
because  by  the  Spirit  they  are  consecrated  to  God  and  quali- 
fied for  his  service.  1  John  2,  20.  27.  When  Paul  says  here, 
hath  anointed  us^  he  means  by  us  all  Christians,  and  of  course 
the  anointing  to  which  he  refers  is  that  which  is  common  to 
all  believers.  This  is  plain,  1.  Because  the  object  of  the  two 
participles,  /Si/SaiCjv  and  xptVas,  here  used,  must  be  the  same ; 
'  who  establisheth  us,  and  hath  anointed  us.''  But  with  the 
former  Paul  expressly  associates  the  Corinthians.  He  says, 
us  with  you.  They  as  well  as  he  were  the  subjects  of  the 
confirmation,  and  therefore  also  of  the  anointing.  2.  What 
follows  of  sealing  and  receiving  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit,  can- 
not with  any  propriety  be  restricted  to  ministers.  3.  In  the 
New  Testament  official  anointing  is  spoken  of  only  in  relation 
to  Christ,  never  of  apostles  or  preachers ;  whereas  believers 
are  said  to  receive  the  unction  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  de- 
sign of  the  apostle  is  not,  as  some  of  the  later  commentators 
say,  to  assert  that  God  had  given  to  him  the  assurance  of  the 
Spirit  as  to  his  fidelity  in  preaching  the  gospel ;  but  to  show 
that  believers-  were  indebted  to  God  for  their  faith,  and  that  he 
would  certainly  cause  them  to  persevere.  Is  God  /  God  it  is 
who  confirms  and  anoints  his  people.  Comp.  5,  5  for  a  simi« 
larly  constructed  passage.  This  is  the  common  and  natural 
explanation.  Billroth  and  Olshausen  render  it  thus :  '  God, 
who  establishes  and  anointed  us,  also  sealed  us.'  But  this 
makes  the  first  part  of  the  verse  too  subordinate  ;  the  sealing 
is  not  the  dominant  idea.  It  is  only  one  of  the  several  bene- 
fits specified.  It  is  God  who  establishes,  anoints,  seals  and 
gives  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit.  Who  also  hath  sealed  us.  A 
t^eal  is  used,  1.  To  indicate  proprietorship.  2.  To  authenti- 
cate or  prove  to  be  genuine.     3.  To  preserve  safe  or  inviolate. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  22.  25 

The  Holy  Spirit,  which  in  one  view  is  an  unction,  in  another 
view  is  a  seal.  He  marks  those  in  whom  he  dwells  as  belong- 
ing to  God.     They  bear  the  seal  of  God  upon  them.     Rev.  7, 

2.    2  Tim.  2,  19.      Act.  Thorn.  §  26,  6  ^ebs   8ia  tt}?  avrov  cr^payi- 

8os  cVtytvtooTKet  to.  tSia  Trpo/Sara,  God  knows  by  his  seal  his  ow?i 
sheep.  He  also  bears  witness  in  the  hearts  of  believers  that 
they  are  the  chUdren  of  God.  He  authenticates  them  to 
themselves  and  others  as  genuine  believers.  And  he  effectu- 
ally secures  them  from  apostasy  and  perdition.  Eph.  1,3.  4, 
30.  This  last  idea  is  amplified  in  the  next  clause ;  and  hath 
given  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit  in  our  hearts.  The  Holy 
Spirit  is  itself  the  earnest^  i.  e.  at  once  the  foretaste  and  pledge 
of  redemption.  The  word  appa^wv,  pledge.,  is  a  Hebrew  word, 
which  passed  as  a  mercantile  term,  probably  from  the  Pheni- 
cian,  into  the  Greek  and  Latin.  It  is  properly  that  part  of 
the  purchase  money  paid  in  advance,  as  a  security  for  the  re- 
mainder. The  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of 
his  people,  is  that  part  of  the  blessings  of  redemption,  which 
God  gives  them  as  a  pledge  of  their  full  and  final  salvation. 
So  certain,  therefore,  as  the  Spirit  dwells  in  us,  so  ^rtai»-is 
our  final  salvation.  "  If  any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
he  is  none  of  his.  .  .  But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  that  raised  up 
Jesus  from  the  dead  dwell  in  you,  he  that  raised  up  Christ 
from  the  dead  shall  also  quicken  your  mortal  bodies  by  his 
Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you,"  Rom.  8,  9-11.  The  indwelling 
of  the  Spirit  is  therefore  called  the  first-fruits  of  redemption. 
Rom.  8,  23.  Comp.  Ej^h.  1, 14.  2  Cor.  5,  5.  There  is  but  one 
^hing  stated  in  these  verses,  and  that  is  that  God  establishes 
or  renders  his  people  firm  and  secure  in  their  union  with 
Christ,  and  in  their  participation  of  the  benefits  of  redemption. 
How  he  does  this,  and  the  evidence  that  he  does  it,  is  ex- 
pressed or  presented  by  sajdng  he  hath  anointed,  sealed,  and 
given  us  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit.  The  indwelling  of  the 
Spirit,  therefore,  renders  the  believer  secure  and  steadfast ;  it 
is  his  anointing  ;  it  is  the  seal  of  God  impressed  upon  the  soul, 
and  therefore  the  pledge  of  redemption.  The  fruits  of  the 
Spirit  are  the  only  evidence  of  his  presence ;  so  that  while 
those  who  experience  and  manifest  those  fruits  may  rejoice  in 
the  certainty  of  salvation,  those  who  are  destitute  of  them 
have  no  right  to  appropriate  to  themselves  the  consolation  of 
this  and  similar  declarations  of  the  word  of  God.  The  perso* 
verance  of  the  saints  is  a  perseverance  in  holiness. 


26  II.    CORINTHIANS    1,  23.24. 

23.  Moreover,  I  call  God  for  a  record  upon  my 
soul,  that  to  spare  you  I  came  not  as  yet  unto  Corinth. 

Paul  here  returns  to  the  original  charge.  The  complaint 
against  him  for  not  having  executed  his  purpose  of  going  at 
once  from  Ephesus  to  Corinth,  he  had  left  on  one  side  to  meet 
the  more  serious  charge  of  inconsistency  in  his  teaching. 
Having  answered  that  accusation,  he  here  says.  But  I  sparing 
you^  i.  e.  for  the  sake  of  avoiding  giving  you  pain,  came  not 
again  to  Corinth.  The  obvious  implication  is,  that  such  was 
the  state  of  things  in  Corinth  that  had  he  gone  there  immedi- 
ately on  leaving  Ephesus,  as  he  had  originally  intended,  he 
would  have  been  obliged  to  appear  among  them  with  a  rod. 
1  Cor.  4,  21.  It  was  to  avoid  that  necessity,  and  to  give  them 
the  opportunity  to  correct  abuses  before  he  came,  that  he  had 
deferred  his  visit.  As  there  was  no  available  testimony  by 
which  the  apostle  could  prove  that  such  was  his  motive,  he 
confirms  it  by  an  oath.  I  invoke  God  as  a  witness,  i.  e.  I 
call  upon  the  omniscient  God,  who  is  the  avenger  of  all  perju- 
ry, to  bear  testimony  to  the  truth  of  what  I  say.  "An  oath 
for  confirmation  is  the  end  of  all  strife,"  Heb.  6,  16.  All  the 
bonds  of  society  are  loosened,  and  all  security  of  life  and  prop- 
erty is  lost,  if  men  are  not  to  be  believed  upon  their  oaths. 
This  shows  that  human  society  depends  on  the  sanctity  of 
an  oath ;  and  as  the  oath  derives  all  its  sacredness  from  taith 
in  God,  as  the  {)rovidential  and  moral  governor  of  the  world, 
it  is  obvious  that  society  cannot  exist  without  religion.  Su- 
perstition and  false  religion,  although  great  evils,  are  far  bet- 
ter than  atheism.  The  words  tVt  rrjv  iixrjv  iJ/vxT^v,  i-endered  o?i 
my  soul,  may  mean  against  my  soul ;  or,  I  summon  God  to 
me  as  a  witness.  The  latter  idea  includes  the  former,  for,  as 
Calvin  says,  "  He  who  uses  God  as  a  witness,  cites  the  punish- 
er  of  falsehood.'* 

24.  Not  for  that  we  have  dommion  over  your  faith, 
but  are  helpers  of  your  joy  :  for  by  faith  ye  stand. 

Tliis  is  intended  to  moderate  and  explain  what  precedes. 
'  Wlien  I  speak  ot'sj)aring  yon,  I  do  not  wish  to  intimate  that  I 
consider  myself  the  lord  over  your  faith.'  Not  for  that,  ovx  on, 
equivalent  to,  I  do  not  sag  that  we  have  dominion  over  your 
liiith.  Some  say  faith  is  here  used  for  believers,  (the  abstract 
for  the  concrete,)  we  have  not  dominion  over  believers ;  or,  as 


II.   CORINTHIANS    1,  24.  27 

St.  Peter  says,  are  not  lords  over  God's  heritage.  1  Pet.  5,  3. 
Others  s^j  faith  here  means  faith-life;  we  have  not  dominion 
over  your  Christian  Ufe.  Both  of  these  interpietations  ai-e 
unnatural  and  unnecessary.  The  word  is  to  be  taken  in  its 
ordinary  sense.  Paul  disclaims  all  authority  over  their  faith, 
either  as  a  man  or  as  an  apostle.  It  was  not  for  him,  and  if 
not  for  him,  surely  for  no  other  man  or  set  of  men,  to  deter- 
mine what  they  should  believe.  He  called  upon  the  Galatiana 
to  denounce  him,  or  even  an  angel  from  heaven,  as  accursed, 
xf  he  preached  another  gospel.  Gal.  1,  8.  Faith  rests  not  on 
the  testimony  of  man,  but  on  the  testimony  of  God.  When 
we  believe  the  Scriptures,  it  is  not  man,  but  God  whom  we 
believe.'  Therefore  faith  is  subject  not  to  man  but  to  God 
alone.  This  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  plenary  inspira- 
tion of  the  apostles,  and  with  our  confidence  in  them  as  the 
infalhble  witnesses  of  the  truth.  When  a  man  speaks  through 
a  trumpet,  it  is  the  man  and  not  the  trumpet  that  we  believe. 
Or  when  we  read  a  printed  page,  we  have  confidence  in  the 
trustworthiness  of  the  words  as  symbols  of  thought,  but  it  is 
the  mind  expressed  by  those  symbols  with  which  we  are  in 
communion.  So  the  apostles  were  but  the  organs  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  what  they  spoke  as  such,  they  could  not  recall  or 
modify.  What  they  should  communicate  was  not  under  their 
control ;  they  w^ere  not  the  lords,  so  to  speak,  of  the  gospel, 
so  that  they  could  make  it  what  they  pleased.  Not  at  all ; 
ihey  were  as  much  subject  to  the  communication  which  they 
received,  and  as  much  bound  to  believe  what  they  were  made 
the  instruments  of  teaching,  as  other  men.  Paul  therefore 
places  himself  alongside  of  his  brethren,  not  over  them  as  a 
lord,  but  as  a  joint-believer  with  them  in  the  gospel  which  he 
preached,  and  a  helper  of  their  joy.  That  is,  his  office  was  to 
co-operate  with  them  in  the  promotion  of  their  spiritual  wel- 
fare. It  was  not  the  end  of  the  apostleship  to  give  pain  or  to 
inflict  punishment,  but  to  promote  the  real  happiness  of  the 
people.  For  by  faith  ye  stand.  The  meaning  of  this  cluuse 
is  doubtful.  Taken  by  themselves  the  words  may  mean,  '  Ye 
stand  firm  or  independently  as  to  taith.'  This  would  suit  the 
connection  as  indicated  hj  for.  *  We  are  not  lords  over  your 
faith,  but  merely  helpers,  for  you  stand,  independently  as  to 
faith.'  Or  the  meaning  may  be  what  is  expressed  in  our  ver- 
Bion,  '  Ye  stand  by  faith.'  Then  the  connection,  as  explained 
by  Calvin,  is,  '  Since  it  is  the  effect  and  nature  of  faith  to  sus- 
tain or  cause  you  to  stand,  it  is  absurd  that  it  should  be  sti1> 


28  II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  24. 

ject  to  man,  or  that  we  should  have  dominion  over  your 
laith.'  This,  however,  is  rather  an  obscure  argument.  Ac- 
cording to  Meyer  the  connection  is  with  the  immediately  pre- 
ceding words,  '  We  are  helpers  of  your  joy,  because  ye  are 
steadfast  as  to  faith.'  That  is,  steadfastness  in  faith  is  necessa- 
ry to  joy.  The  most  natural  interpretation  probably  is  that 
given  by  Erasmus :  fidei  nomine  nullum  habemus  in  vos  domi- 
nium, in  qua  perseveratis ;  sed  est  in  vita  quod  in  vobis  cor- 
rectum  volebam.  '  Over  your  faith  I  have  no  dominion,  for  in 
that  ye  stand ;  but,  when  I  speak  of  not  sparing,  I  had  refer- 
ence to  your  conduct.'  He  had  authority  in  matters  of  dis- 
cipline, but  not  in  matters  of  faith.  As  to  the  latter,  he  and 
they  were  equally  under  subjection  to  the  revelation  of  God. 
He  indeed,  as  the  organ  of  the  Spirit,  could  declare  infallibly 
what  that  revelation  was,  but  he  could  not  go  counter  to  it, 
and  was  to  be  judged  by  it.  If  the  inspired  apostles  recog- 
nised not  only  their  subjection  to  the  word  of  God,  but  also 
the  right  of  the  peoj^le  to  judge  whether  their  teachings  were 
in  accordance  with  the  supreme  standard,  it  is  most  evident 
that  no  church  authority  can  make  any  thing  contrary  to 
Scripture  obligatory  on  believers,  and  that  the  ultimate  right 
to  decide  whether  ecclesiastical  decisions  are  in  accordance 
with  the  word  of  God,  rests  with  the  people.  In  other  words, 
Paul  recognises,  even  in  reference  to  himself,  the  right  of  pri- 
vate judgment.  He  allowed  any  man  to  pronounce  him 
anathen.a,  if  he  did  not  preach  the  gospel  as  it  had  been  re- 
vealed and  authenticated  to  the  church.  Quum  eorum  fidei 
dominari  se  negat,  signiticat  injustam  banc  esse  et  minima 
tolerandam  potestatem,  inio  tyrannideni  in  ecclesia.  Fides 
enim  prorsus  ab  hominum  jugo  soluta,  liberriniaque  esse  debet. 
Notanduni  autem,  quis  loquatur:  nam  siquis  oumino  sit  mor- 
talium  qui  jus  habeat  tale  dominium  sibi  vindicaudi,  Paulus 
certe  dignus  hac  prajrogativa  fuit,  fatetur  autem  sibi  non 
competere.  Itaque  colligimus,  fidem  non  aliam  subjectionem 
agnoscere,  quam  verbi  Dei:  hominum  imperio  minime  esse 
obuoxiam.     Calvin. 


II.   CORINTHIANS  2,  1.  2d 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  first  paragraph,  vs.  1-4,  relates  to  the  change  of  his  plan  of  going  im- 
mediately to  Corinth.  In  vs.  5-11  he  refers  to  the  case  of  discipline 
mentioned  in  his  former  letter.  In  vs.  12-14  he  states  why  he  did  not 
remain  in  Troas.  And  in  vs.  14-17  he  pours  out  his  heart  in  gratitude 
to  God  for  the  continued  triumph  of  the  gospel. 

The  true  reason  why  the  apostle  did  not  go  immediately  to 
Corinth^  and  his  vieics  in  reference  to  the  offender  whose 
excom^nunication  he  had  insisted  upon  in  his  former  letter. 

There  is  no  change  of  subject  in  this  chapter.  The  apostle 
after  defending  himself  from  the  charge  of  levity  in  conduct 
and  inconsistency  in  doctrine,  had  said,  in  v.  23  of  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  that  he  did  not  go  to  Corinth  before  giving 
the  church  time  to  comply  with  the  injunctions  contained  in 
his  former  letter,  because  he  did  not  wish  to  appear  among 
them  as  a  judge.  He  here  says,  in  amplification,  that  he  had 
determined  not  again  to  visit  Corinth  under  circumstances 
which  could  only  give  pain  to  the  Corinthians  and  to  himself. 
He  knew  that  he  could  not  give  them  sorrow  without  being 
himself  grieved,  and  he  was  assured  that  if  he  was  happy  they 
would  share  in  his  joy,  vs.  1-4.  The  sorrow  occasioned  by 
the  incestuous  person  was  not  confined  to  the  apostle,  but 
shared  by  the  church.  He  was  satisfied  with  the  course 
which  the  church  had  pursued  in  reference  to  that  case,  and 
was  willing  the  oflfender  should  be  restored  to  their  fellowship 
if  they  were,  vs.  5-11.  His  anxiety  about  them  was  so  great 
that  not  finding  Titus,  from  whom  he  expected  to  receive 
intelligence,  he  was  unable  to  remain  at  Troas,  but  passed 
over  into  Macedonia  to  meet  him  on  his  way,  vs.  12.  13.  The 
intelligence  which  he  received  from  Titus  being  favourable, 
the  apostle  expresses  in  strong  terms  his  gratitude  to  God 
who  always  caused  him  to  triumph,  vs.  15-17. 

1.  But  I  determined  this  with  myself,  that  I  would 
not  come  again  to  you  in  heaviness. 

The  connection  is  with  what  immediately  precedes.  'I 
deferred  my  visit  in  order  to  spare  jou,  not  that  I  assume  to 
be  a  lord  over  your  faith,  but  a  helper  of  your  joy.  But  the 
true  reason  for  my  not  coming  vv'as  that  I  did  not  wish  to 


80  II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  2. 

come  with  heaviness.'  The  words  cKptva  cjaaww,  rendered  2 
deter'mi7ied  icith  myself^  may  mean  simply  I  detei^nine  as  to 
myself.  I  had  made  up  my  mind ;  or, '  I  determined /or  my- 
'Self  i.  e.  for  my  oAvn  sake.  This  perhaps  is  to  be  preferred. 
The  apostle  thus  delicately  intimates  that  it  was  not  merely  to 
spare  them,  but  also  himself,  that  he  put  off  his  visit.  The 
word  this  refers  to  the  purpose  which  the  apostle  had  formed, 
and  which  is  explained  by  the  following  infinitive,  /xt)  Ik^dv, 
not  to  come.  Two  explanations  are  given  of  the  following 
clause.  According  to  the  one,  the  meaning  is,  '  I  determined 
that  my  second  visit  should  not  be  with  sorrow ; '  according 
to  the  other,  '  I  determined  not  a  second  time  to  visit  you  in 
sorrow.'  In  the  one  case  the  implication  is  that  Paul  had,  at 
this  time,  been  only  once  in  Corinth ;  in  the  other,  the  passage 
implies  that  he  had  already  (i.  e.  after  his  first  visit)  been  to 
Corinth  under  circumstances  painful  to  himself  and  to  the 
church.  There  are  two  reasons  for  preferring  this  latter  view. 
The  first  is,  that  according  to  the  position  of  the  words,  as 
given  in  all  the  older  manuscripts,  (/u,^  iraXw  Iv  kvirrj  vrpos  v/xas 
cA-^ctv,)  the  TraXtv,  again.,  belongs  to  the  whole  clause  and  not 
exclusively  to  l\^Civ.  The  sense,  therefore,  is  that  he  deter- 
mined not  a  second  time  to  come  with  sorrow,  (he  had  done 
that  once.)  The  other  reason  is,  that  there  is  evidence  from 
other  passages  that  Paul  had  been  twice  to  Corinth  before 
this  letter  was  written.  See  12,  14.  21.  13,  1.  That  there  is 
no  mention  in  the  Acts  of  this  intermediate  journey,  is  no  suf^ 
ficient  reason  for  denying  it,  as  the  passages  referred  to  are  so 
explicit.  To  make  the  second  visit  one  by  letter,  as  Calvin 
(venerat  euim  semel  per  epistolam)  and  others  have  done,  is 
evidently  unnatural.  Having  gone  once  to  correct  abuses  and 
tf)  exercise  severity,  he  was  anxious  not  to  have  a  second  pain- 
ful interview  of  the  same  kind,  and  therefore,  instead  of  going 
to  them,  as  he  had  intended,  directly  from  Corinth,  he»waited 
to  learn  through  Titus  what  had  been  the  effect  of  his  letter. 
With  heaviness.,  iv  ^virrj^  with  sorrow.,  i.  e.  causing  sorrow  to 
you.  This  explanation  is  required  by  the  following  verse, 
otherwise  the  meaning  would  more  naturiilly  be  in  sorrow., 
I.  e.  in  a  sorrowful  state  of  mind,  as  the  woid  kviri]  everywhere 
olse  with  Paul  means  a  state  of  grief. 

2.  For  if  I  make  you  sorry,  ^^  ho  is  he  that  inaketh 
me  glad,  but  the  same  that  is  made  sorry  by  me  ? 


II.  CORINTHIANS  2,  3.  81 

This  is  the  reason  why  he  did  not  wish  to  come  brin2:ing 
sorrow  with  him ;  'For  if,'  says  he,  'I  make  you  sorry,  who  is 
there  to  make  me  glad  ?  How  can  I  be  happy,  if  you  are 
afflicted?  Unless  my  visit  cause  you  joy,  it  can  bring  no  joy 
to  me.'  As  inspiration  leaves  full  play  to  all  the  characteristic 
peculiarities  of  its  subject,  in  reading  the  writings  of  inspired 
men  we  learn  not  only  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  but  also  the 
personal  character  of  the  writers.  The  urbanity  of  the  apostle 
Paul,  his  refinement  and  courtesy,  are  just  as  plainly  revealed 
in  his  epistles  as  his  intellectual  power  and  moral  courage. 
The  passage  before  us  is  one  of  many  illustrations  of  the  truth 
of  this  remark,  furnished  by  this  epistle.  Who  is  he  that 
maketh  7ne  glad^  but  the  scmie  that  is  tnade  sorry  by  me.  The 
singular  is  used,  not  because  a  particular  individual,  much  less 
because  the  incestuous  person,  is  specially  referred  to,  but  be- 
cause the  case  is  stated  in  the  form  of  a  general  proposition. 
'I  cannot  expect  joy  from  one  to  whom  I  bring  sorrovr.' 
Such  was  the  apostle's  love  for  the  Corinthians  that  unless 
they  were  happy  he  could  not  be  happy.  This  is  the  natural 
and  commonly  received  interpretation  of  the  passage.  Chry- 
sostom,  and  many  of  the  ancient  commentators,  and  some  also 
of  the  moderns,  give  a  different  view  of  its  meaning.  '  Who 
gives  me  joy,  but  he  who  allows  himself  (A.i;7ro7;/xci/os  as  middle 
and  not  passive)  to  be  grieved  by  me.'  Tliat  is,  no  one  causes 
me  so  much  joy  as  he  who  is  brought  to  repentance  by  me. 
But  this  is  obviously  inconsistent  with  the  context.  The 
verse,  as  thus  explained,  gives  no  reason  why  Paul  did  not 
wish  to  go  to  Corinth  bringing  sorrow.  On  the  contrary,  the 
more  of  that  kind  of  sorrow  he  brought  with  him,  or  was  oc- 
casioned by  his  visit,  the  better.  This  interpretation  would 
make  the  apostle  say,  '  I  will  not  come  with  sorrow,  for  noth- 
ing gives  me  so  much  pleasure  as  to  cause  (godly)  sorrow.' 
To  avoid  this  incongruity  Olshausen  says  the  connection  is  to 
be  thus  understood :  Paul  determined  that  he  would  not  come 
with  sorrow,  because  he  feared  that  few  of  the  Corinthians 
would  give  him  the  happiness  of  seeing  that  they  had  been 
made  sorry  by  his  former  reproofs.  But  this  makes  the  pas- 
sage itself  a  reproof,  an  insinuation  that  they  had  not  profited 
by  his  first  letter.  This  is  contrary  to  the  whole  spirit  of  the 
passage,  which  is  overflowing  with  confidence  and  affection. 

3.  And  I  wrote  this  same  unto  you,  lest,  when  1 
2* 


82  II.    CORINTHIANS   2,  3. 

came,  I  should  have  sorrow  from  them  of  whom  I 
ought  to  rejoice ;  having  confidence  in  you  all  that  my 
joy  is  (the  joy)  of  you  all. 

Having  said  that  his  motive  for  not  coming  at  once  to  Cor- 
inth was  to  avoid  giving  them  sorrow,  he  here  adds,  'And  I 
wrote  what  I  did  in  my  former  letter  that,  when  I  came,  I 
might  not  have  sorrow.'  Instead  of  going  in  person  to  cor- 
rect the  evils  which  existed  in  the  church  of  Corinth,  he  wrote 
to  them  that  those  evils  might  be  corrected  before  he  came, 
and  thus  his  coming  would  be  a  source  of  joy  to  both  parties. 
It  is  evident  from  tlie  preceding  context,  and  from  vs.  4  and 
9,  that  eypai//a  here  refers  not  to  this  epistle,  but  to  the  former 
one.  This  same^  tovto  avro,  that  very  thing^  that  is,  the  very 
thing  which  I  did  write  respecting  the  incestuous  person. 
The  expression  seems  to  have  special  reference  to  that  case, 
because  that  is  evidently  the  case  to  which  the  following 
verses  relate.  It  appears  that  the  point  about  which  the 
apostle  was  most  anxious  was,  how  the  Corinthians  would  act 
in  regard  to  his  command,  1  Cor.  5,  13,  to  put  away  from 
among  them  "  that  wicked  person."  He  seems  to  have  feared 
that  his  enemies  might  have  had  influence  enough  with  the 
church,  to  prevent  their  executing  his  command.  He  there- 
fore Avaited  in  painful  suspense  to  learn  the  issue.  And  when 
Titus,  on  his  return  from  Corinth,  informed  him  that  they  had 
not  only  promptly  obeyed  his  directions,  but  that  the  offender 
himself  and  the  whole  church  had  been  brought  to  deep  and 
genuine  repentance,  his  heart  was  filled  with  gratitude  to  God, 
and  with  love  to  the  people  who  had  manifested  such  a  Chris- 
tian spirit.  All  this  is  plain  from  what  is  said  in  ch.  Y.  Eras- 
mus and  several  other  commentators  render  tovto  avro  hac 
eadem  de  causa,  for  this  very  reason.  The  sense  would  then 
be,  '  I  determined  I  would  not  come  to  you  with  sorrow,  and 
for  that  very  reason  I  wrote  to  you  that  I  might  not.' 
This,  although  it  suits  the  preceding  context,  is  not  so  con- 
sistent with  what  follows  as  the  common  interpretation ;  for 
in  the  following  verses  the  apostle  states  the  reasons  for  his 
writing  as  lie  had  done  in  his  former  letter. 

Lest  when  I  came  I  should  Jtave  sorrow  from  them  of 
whom  I  ought  to  rejoice.  That  is,  '  I  wrote  what  I  did  that  I 
might  not  have  sorrow  fiom  those,  who  should  be  to  me  a 
source  of  joy.'  He  wished  all  painful  questions  settled  before 
he  came.     JIaving  conjideixce  in  you  all  that  my  joy  is  the  joy 


II.   CORINTHIANS   2,4.  S3 

of  you  all.  Pan!  in  saying  that  he  wished  all  causes  of  painful 
collision  might  be  removed  out  of  the  way  before  he  went  to 
Corinth,  did  not  isolate  himself  from  the  people,  as  though 
concerned  only  for  his  own  peace  of  mind,  but  was  satisfied 
that  what  made  him  happy  would  make  them  happy.  My  joy 
will  be  the  joy  of  you  all.  This  does  not  mean  merely  that  ft 
would  give  them  pleasure  to  see  hun  happy,  but  also  that  obe- 
dience on  their  part,  and  the  consequent  purity  and  prosperity 
of  the  church,  were  as  necessary  to  their  happiness  as  to  his. 
Paul  says  he  had  this  confidence  in  them  all^  although  it  is 
abundantly  evident  that  there  were  men  among  them  who 
were  his  bitter  opponents.  These  latter  he  here  leaves  out  of 
view,  and  speaks  of  the  majority,  probably  the  great  body,  of 
the  church  as  though  it  were  the  whole. 

4.  For  out  of  much  affliction  and  anguish  of  heart 
I  wrote  unto  you  with  many  tears ;  not  that  ye  should 
be  grieved,  but  that  ye  may  know  the  love  which  I 
have  the  more  abundantly  towards  you. 

The  connection  is  either  with  the  immediately  preceding 
clause,  'I  have  confidence  in  you,  for  otherwise  it  would  not 
have  given  me  so  much  pain  to  write  as  I  did ; '  or,  what  is 
more  natural  because  more  direct,  the  reference  is  to  the  mo- 
tives which  dictated  his  letter.  '  I  was  influenced  by  the  de- 
sire of  promoting  your  happmess,  for  to  me  it  was  a  most 
painful  duty.'  Out  of  {Ik)  indicates  the  source.  His  letter 
flowed  from  a  broken  heart.  Affliction  and  anguish  refer  to 
his  inward  feelings,  not  to  his  outward  circumstances,  for  both 
are  qualified  by  the  word  heart.  It  was  out  of  an  afflicted,  an 
oppressed  heart,  that  he  wrote.  With  tnayiy  tears^  (^^s) 
through  many  tears.  The  union  of  fidelity  and  love  which 
renders  parental  discipline  peculiarly  effective,  gives  also  pe- 
culiar power  to  ecclesiastical  censures.  When  the  offender  is 
made  to  feel  that,  while  his  sin  is  punished,  he  Mmself  is  loved ; 
and  that  the  end  aimed  at  is  not  his  suffering  but  his  good, 
he  is  the  more  likely  to  be  brought  to  repentance.  Every 
pastor  must  see  in  the  apostle's  love  for  the  Corinthians,  and 
in  the  extreme  sorrow  with  which  he  exercised  discipline  in 
tlie  case  of  offenders,  an  instructive  example  for  his  imitation. 
Not  that  ye  should  he  grieved,  my  object  in  writing  was  not 
to  cause  you  sorrow,  hiit  that  ye  may  know  the  love  that  1 


34  II.   CORINTHIANS  2 


have  the  more  abundantly  towards  you.  The  ends  which  the 
apostle  desired  to  accomplish  by  his  former  letter  Avere  numer- 
ous, and  he  therefore  sometimes  specifies  one,  and  sometimes 
another.  Here,  he  says,  it  was  to  manifest  his  love ;  in  v.  9 
he  says  it  was  to  test  their  obedience ;  in  ch.  V  he  says  it  was 
to  bring  them  to  repentance.  These  are  not  incompatible  ends, 
and  therefore  there  is  no  inconsistency  between  these  several 
statements.  The  love  which  I  have  the  more  abundantly 
toicards  you.  This  naturally  means  the  special  love  which  I 
have  for  you.  His  love  for  them  was  more  abundant,  or 
greater,  than  that  which  he  had  for  any  other  church.  This 
view  is  borne  out  by  numerous  other  passages  in  these  two 
epistles,  which  go  to  show  that  Paul's  love  for  the  Corinthian 
church  was,  for  some  reason,  peculiarly  strong.  As  vs.  5-1 1 
have  direct  reference  to  the  case  of  the  incestuous  person,  it  is 
the  more  probable  that  all  that  he  says  in  the  preceding  verses 
as  to  his  reasons  for  not  coming  sooner  to  Corinth,  and  as  to 
the  sorrow  and  anxiety  which  he  felt  about  the  state  of  the 
church  there,  had  special  reference  to  that  case. 


5.  But  if  any  have  caused  grief,  he  hath  not  grieved 
me,  but  in  part,  that  I  may  not  overcharge  you  all. 

The  connection  between  this  paragraph,  vs.  5-11,  and 
what  precedes  is  natural  and  obvious.  Paul  had  been  speak- 
ing of  his  motives  for  writing  his  former  letter.  It  was  not 
intended  to  give  them  sorrow.  If  sorrow  had  been  occasioned, 
it  had  not  come  from  him.  This  led  him  to  speak  more  par- 
ticularly of  the  case  which  had  occasioned  so  much  distress. 
The  proper  interpretation  of  this  particular  verse  is,  however, 
a  matter  of  great  doubt.  The  translation  is  of  necessity,  in 
this  case,  an  exposition,  and  therefore  the  grounds  of  doubt 
do  not  appear  to  the  English  reader.  Our  translators,  after 
Luther,  assume  that  airo  /-tepous,  in  part^  are  to  be  connected 
with  the  preceding  clause,  and  Travras  v/xas,  you  all,  with  eVt- 
PapCii^  overcharge.  Thus  construed  the  sense  can  only  be, 
'  If  any  one  has  caused  grief,  lie  has  not  grieved  me,  but  in 
part,  that  is,  I  am  not  the  only  person  aggiieved.  I  say  this, 
lest  I  should  bear  hard  upon  you  all.  It  would  be  a  severe 
reflection  on  you  to  say  that  you  did  not  feel  any  sorrow  for 
the  offence  in  question.'  According  to  this  view,  the  design 
of  the  passage  is  to  guard  against  the  impression  that  he 


II.    CORINTHIANS    2,  6.  35 

meant  to  charge  them  with  indifForence.  But  to  this  it  is  ob- 
jected that  to  express  this  sense  el  ixrj^  and  not  d>Aa,  would  ha 
required.  "  He  hath  not  grieved  me  except  in  part."  And 
secondly,  that  the  idea  thus  expressed  is  not  suited  to  the 
context.  The  main  idea  evidently  is,  '  He  hath  not  grieved 
me  but  you.'  The  subordinate  words  and  clauses  therefore 
must  be  accomiaodated  to  that  idea.  Hence  aXX  a-n-o  fxipov-y 
must  be  connected  with  what  follows,  and  rravra^  vfxo.f;  with 
XeX.v7rr]K€v.  Then  the  sense  will  be,  '  He  hath  not  grieved  me, 
but  in  part,  or,  to  a  certain  extent,  (lest  I  should  bear  too 
hard  07i  him,)  you  all.'  The  design  of  the  passage,  according 
to  this  view,  is  to  soften  the  charge  against  the  penitent  ot- 
tender  of  having  been  the  cause  of  sorrow.  This  the  apostle 
does,  first,  by  saying,  "  he  did  not  grieve  me,"  i.  e.  it  was  no 
personal  oflence  against  me  that  he  committed  ;  and  second, 
that  all  the  Corinthians  were  not  afflicted,  it  was  not  a  uni- 
versal sorrow  that  he  caused.  This  substantially  is  the  inter- 
pretation given  by  Calvin  after  Chrysostom,  and  is  the  one 
adopted  by  the  great  majority  of  modern  commentators.  It 
has  the  advantage  of  being  not  only  suited  to  the  meaning  of 
the  words,  but  to  the  whole  tone  of  the  following  context, 
which  is  eminently  mild  and  concihatory.  The  apostle's  heart 
was  overflowing  with  the  tenderest  feelings  towards  his  Co- 
rinthian brethren,  and  he  was  evidently  solicitous  to  heal  the 
salutary  wounds  inflicted,  by  his  former  letter.  There  is  still 
another  view  of  the  passage  which  should  be  mentioned.  It 
may  be  pointed  so  as  to  read  thus :  '  He  hath  not  grieved  me, 
but  in  part  (that  I  may  not  overcharge  all)  you.'  This,  how- 
ever, unnaturally  separates  the  words  7rdvTa<s  {'/xa?,  you  all. 


6.  Sufficient  to  such  a  man  is  this  punishment, 
which  (was  inflicted)  of  many. 

I  do  not  wish  to  be  severe  towards  him,  for  the  punish- 
ment which  he  has  received  is  sufficient.  The  word  rj  iTriTiixia, 
rendered  punisliment,  occurs  only  in  Wisdom  3,  10  in  this 
sense,  and  therefore  many  assume  that  it  here  does  not  mean 
punisliment,  but  reproof.  The  word  rendered  sufficient,  Uavov, 
is  used  substantively.  "  This  punishment  is  a  sufficiency,  or  a 
satisfaction."  Comp.  Matt.  6,  34  for  a  similar  construction. 
Paul  says  the  punishment  or  reproof  was  administered  vtto  tiov 
vXiiavwv,  hy  tJie  m,ajority,  intimating  that  all  did  not  concur  in 


30  II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  6. 

it.  This,  however,  is  not  a  necessary  inference,  because  ol 
TrAeioves  may  mean  the  man^ ,  the  whole  body  considered  as 
many,  because  composed  of  many  members.  There  are  three 
views  taken  of  this  verse  in  connection  with  what  follows.  In 
his  former  letter  the  apostle  had  not  only  commanded  the 
church  to  excommunicate  the  person  here  referred  to,  but  de 
clared  his  own  determination  to  deliver  him  to  Satan  for  the 
destruction  of  the  flesh.  1  Cor.  5,  5.  Grotius  supposes  that 
m  consequence  of  that  judgment  he  was  seized  with  some 
bodily  malady,  for  delivery  from  which  Paul,  in  this  connec- 
tion, declares  his  willingness  that  the  Corinthians  should  pray. 
Of  this,  however,  the  passage  gives  no  intimation.  A  second 
view  is  that  the  sentence  of  excommunication  had  not  been 
carried  into  eflxict,  but  as  the  reproof  admmistered  by  many 
had  had  the  eifect  of  leading  the  oftender  to  repentance,  the 
apostle  here  intimates  his  satisfaction  with  what  the  church 
had  done,  although  his  injunctions  had  not  been  fully  complied 
with.  This  is  the  view  of  Calvin,  Beza,  and  of  many  others.  In 
favour  of  this  explanation  it  is  ui-ged  that  the  expression  "  this 
punishment "  naturally  refers  to  that  punishment  or  reproof 
which  the  Corinthians  had  administered  as  distinguished  from 
that  which  he  had  enjoined;  and  his  saying  '"'' this  punish- 
ment," of  which  he  had  heard,  was  enough,  implies  that  he 
did  not  wish  them  to  proceed  any  further,  but  rather  that 
they  .should  console  the  penitent  by  the  assurance  of  their 
love.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  v.  9  (as  well  as  ch.  V) 
clearly  intimates  that  the  church  had  rendered  a  prompt  obe- 
dience to  the  apostle's  directions.  The  great  majority  of 
commentators,  therefore,  understand  the  passage  to  mean  that 
Paul  did  not  wish  the  excommunication  to  be  continued  any 
longer.  As  it  had  produced  its  desired  effect,  he  was  willing 
that  the  olic^nder  should  be  restored  to  the  communion  of  the 
church.  The  whole  passage  indicates  that  Paul  was  more 
lenient  than  the  church,  for  he  exhorts  his  readers  not  to  be 
too  severe  in  their  treatment  of  their  offending  brother.  A 
passage,  says  Calvin,  himself  a  severe  disciplinarian,  well  to  be 
observed,  as  it  teaches  with  what  equity  and  clemency  the  dis- 
cipline of  the  church  is  to  be  attempered ;  qica  cequitate  et 
clementia  temperanda  sit  discijylina  ecclesiae.  Paul,  he  adds, 
was  satisfied  with  the  repentance  of  the  offender;  whereas  the 
ancient  bishops  gave  forth  their  canons  requiring  a  penance 
of  three,  or  seven  years,  or  even  for  a  life-time,  without  regard 
to  the  contrition  of  the  unhappy  victims  of  their  Beverity. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  I.S.  37 

7.  So  that  contrariwise  ye  (ouglit)  rather  to  forgive 
(him)  and  comfort  (him),  lest  perhaps  such  a  one  should 
he  swallowed  up  with  overmuch  sorrow. 

The  consequence  of  what  is  expressed  in  v.  8  is  indicated 
by  the  words  so  that.  '  The  punishment  being  sufficient,  the 
consequence  is  that,  instead  of  its  being  increased  or  continued, 
you  should  forgive  and  comfort  the  offender.'  As  the  apostle 
seems  to  indicate  wdiat  ought  to  be  done,  most  commentators 
supply  before  the  infinitives  xapidacr^ai  koI  TrapaKoXia-ai  the 
word  3et  or  Seti/,  '  it  is  necessary  to  forgive  and  comfort.'  The 
infinitive  itself,  however,  often  expresses,  after  verbs  of  saying, 
and  the  like,  not  what  is,  but  what  should  be,  e.  g.  Xeyovrcs 
TTcptTe/xvecr-^at,  saying  you  ought  to  he  circumcised.  Acts  15, 
24.  21,  4.  21.  TFme?',  j).  371,  says  that  neither  of  these 
modes  of  explanation  is  necessary,  as  the  infinitives  may  be 
connected  immediately  with  iKavdi/,  '  The  reproof  is  sufficient 
— in  order  to  your  pardoning  and  comforting  him.'  The  deli- 
cacy of  the  apostle  towards  this  offender  is  indicated  by  his 
abstaining  either  from  naming  him,  or  desionating  him  as  he 
had  before  done,  1  Cor.  5,  13,  as  that  icicked person.  He  re- 
fers to  him  simply  as  such  an  one^  without  any  appellation 
vrhich  could  wound  his  feelings.  The  apostle  combined,  there- 
fore, the  strictest  fidelity  with  the  greatest  tenderness.  As 
long  as  the  oftender  was  impenitent  and  persisted  in  his  ot- 
fence,  Paul  insisted  upon  the  severest  punishment.  As  soon 
as  he  acknowledged  and  forsook  his  sin,  he  became  his  earnest 
advocate.  Lest  he  should  be  swcdloiced  up  icith  overmuch 
sorrow.,  that  is,  lest  he  should  be  driven  to  despair  and  thus 
destroyed.  Undue  severity  is  as  much  to  be  avoided  as  undue 
leniency.  The  character  which  Paul  here  exhibits  reflects  the 
image  of  our  heavenly  Father.  His  word  is  filled  with  de- 
nunciations against  impenitent  sinners,  and  at  the  same  time 
with  assurances  of  unbounded  pity  and  tenderness  towards 
the  penitent.  He  never  breaks  the  bruised  reed  or  quenches 
the  smoking  flax. 

8.  AVherefore  I  beseech  you  that  ye  would  confirm 
(\^our)  love  towards  him. 

The  connection  is  either  with  v.  6,  '  His  punishment  is  suf 
ficient — wherefore  confirm  your  love  towards  him  ; '  or  with 
what   immediately  precedes.     '  There  is  danger  of  his  being 


S8  II.   CORIlSrTHIANS   2,  9. 

swallowed  np  with  overmufch  sorrow  unless  you  forgive  hini^ 
wherefore  confirm  your  love  to  him.'  The  latter  method  is 
to  be  preferred,  though  the  sense  is  substantially  the  same. 
J  beseech  you^  frapaKaXro^  the  same  word  which  in  the  preced- 
ing verse  is  used  in  the  sense  of  consoling.  Paul  not  unfre- 
qiientiy  uses  the  same  word  in  the  immediate  connection  in 
different  senses.  1  Cor.  3,  17.  11,  23.  That  ye  loould  con- 
firm^  literally,  to  confirm^  Kvptha-ai.  The  word  properly  means 
to  ratify  with  authority  by  some  public  or  formal  act.  Gal. 
3,  15.  And  this  sense  is  generally  adopted  here.  The  apostle 
is  understood  to  call  upon  them  by  a  formal  act  to  reinstate 
the  offender  in  the  communion  of  the  church,  to  assure  him 
of  their  love,  so  that  he  might  not  have  to  infer  it  merely 
from  their  treatment  of  him.  The  word,  however,  may  mean 
nothing  more  than  is  expressed  in  our  version.  '  I  exhort  you 
to  make  your  love  towards  him  a  matter  of  certainty.'  But 
as  the  implication  is  that  they  had  already  begun  to  manifest 
their  brotherly  affection  for  him,  the  probability  is  that  the 
apostle  wished  them  to  give  their  love  a  formal  ratitication. 

9.  Tor  to  this  end  also  did  I  write,  tliat  I  might 
know  the  proof  of  you,  whether  ye  be  obedient  in  all 
things. 

Verses  9  and  10  are  sometimes  regarded  as  a  parenthesis, 
so  as  to  connect  the  11th  verse  with  the  8th.  '  Contirra  your 
love  towards  him,  lest  Satan  get  an  advantage  over  us.'  But 
a  parenthesis  is  never  to  be  assumed  where  the  grammatical 
construction  continues  unbroken,  and  the  logical  connection  is 
uninterrupted.  The  11th  verse  is  naturally  connected  with 
the  10th,  and  the  9th  with  the  8th.  'Confirm  your  love  to 
him,  for  the  object  of  my  writing  to  you  to  exclude  him  from 
your  fellowship,  has  been  accomj^lished.'  To  this  end  means 
the  end  specified  in  the  latter  part  of  the  verse.  I  wrote^ 
cypai//a,  a  form  of  the  verb  which  is  often  in  the  epistolary  style 
used  of  the  letter  in  the  process  of  being  written.  Rom.  15, 
15.  1  Cor.  9,  15.  1  Pet.  5,  12,  &c.  The  whole  context,  how* 
ever,  shows  that  Paul  refers  to  his  former  letter.  See  vs.  3.  4. 
lie  did  not  write  this  letter  to  test  their  obedience,  though 
tliat  was  one  of  the-  objects  of  his  former  epistle.  Paul  says, 
'I  also  wrote.'  This  also  may  indicate  that  it  was  the  object 
of  liis  former  letter  as  well  as  of  the  exhortation  which  he  had 
just  given  them,  to  test  their  obedience.     But  such  was  not 


II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  10.  39 

the  object  of  that  exhortation.  It  is  better  therefore  to  un- 
derstand the  (Kat)  also^  as  simply  intended  to  give  prominence 
to  the  words  I  wrote^  as  something  additional  to  other  thinj^s 
which  he  had  done  with  the  same  general  object.  'To  this 
^na  I  also  wrote,  as  well  as  did  many  other  things,'  <fec.  The 
end  (although  not  the  only  one),  which  the  apostle  had  in  view 
in  enjoining  on  the  church  the  excommunication  of  the  person 
here  referred  to,  was,  as  he  says,  that  I  might  know  the  j^roof 
of  you.  The  word  used  is  8oKt/x^,  which  means  triaX  8,  2, 
"  trial  of  affliction ; "  or,  proof  test^  13,  3,  "As  ye  seek  a  proof 
of  Chiist  speaking  in  me ; "  or,  the  result  of  trial,  what  is  ap- 
proved, integrity  that  has  been  tested.  Phil.  2,  22,  "Ye  know 
his  tried  integrity."  The  last  meaning  is  the  best  suited  to 
this  place.  '  That  I  might  know  your  integrity,  i.  e.  your  true 
Christian  temper.'  This  is  explained  by  saying  he  wished  to 
see  Avhether  they  Avould  be  obedient  in  all  things^  eis  -n-avTa^ 
i?i  reference  to  all  things.  These  latter  words  stand  first, 
'  Whether  as  to  all  things  ye  ai-e  obedient,'  which  is  more  em- 
phatic. Obedience  to  legitimate  authority  is  one  of  the  fruits 
and  evidences  of  Christian  sincerity.  A  rebellious,  self-willed, 
disobedient  spirit  is  a  strong  indication  of  an  unsanctified 
heart.  As  the  Corinthians  had  proved  themselves  obedient 
to  the  apostle's  directions,  and  as  the  offender  was  truly  peni- 
tent, the  object  of  his  letter,  both  as  it  related  to  them  and  to 
him,  had  been  attained,  and  therefore  there  was  no  reason  for 
the  continuance  of  the  punishment. 

10.  To  whom  ye  forgive  any  thing,  I  (forgive)  also  : 
for  if  I  forgave  any  thing,  to  whom  I  forgave  (it),*  for 
your  sakes  (forgave  I  it)  in  the  person  of  Christ. 

The  apostle  having  exhorted  the  Corinthians  to  forgive 
their  repentant  brother,  says  he  was  ready  to  join  in  that  for- 
giveness. To  whom  ye  forgive  any  thing  ^  I  also.  Although 
this  is  stated  generally,  as  though  he  meant  to  say  that  he 
would  forgive  any  one  whom  they  were  ready  to  forgive,  yet 
it  is  obvious  from  the  context  that  he  intended  to  be  under- 

*  The  received  text  here  reads  koX  yap  iyw  ei  ti  KexapiTfJ-o-i,  cp  Kexoipio-fiaif 
for  also  lif  I  have  forgiven  any  thing^  to  ichoin  I  forgave.  Griesbach,  Lacb* 
manu,  Tischendorf,  Riickert,  Meyer,  and  others,  after  the  majority  of  aiicieat 
MSS.  read,  kuX  yap  iyu)  o  K^x'i-pt-o'h'-o.i,  ^t  n  Kexapis/j-ai,  for  also  I  what  I  havt 
forgiven,  if  I  have  forgiven  any  thing. 


40  II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  10. 

stood  as  referring  to  that  particular  case.  He  was  satisfied 
with  their  course,  and  also  with  the  evidence  of  the  repentance 
of  the  offender,  and  therefore  he  was  ready  to  sanction  his 
restoration  to  their  communion.  His  reason  for  this  is  stated 
in  what  follows,  he  did  it  for  their  sake.  His  forgiving,  how- 
ever, was  suspended  upon  theirs.  He  would  not  interfere  to 
restore  the  jjerson  in  question  unless  they  were  satisfied  to  re- 
ceive him.  He  therefore  says.  If  I  have  forgiven  any  thing, 
that  is,  if  the  forgiveness  expressed  in  the  foregoing  clause  is 
to  take  efiect  and  to  be  considered  as  already  done,  I  have 
done  it  for  your  sake.  He  was  influenced  by  no  personal  con- 
sideration either  in  the  censure  originally  pronounced,  or  in 
his  present  course,  but  solely  by  a  desire  to  promote  their 
best  interests.  lit  the  person  of  Christy  or,  in  the  presence  of 
Christ.  This  latter  interpretation  is  the  more  consistent  with 
usage,  and  is  generally  adopted.  The  meaning  is  that  he  act- 
ed in  this  matter  as  in  the  presence  of  Christ,  i.  e.  as  though 
Christ  were  looking  on.  The  other  explanation,  which  is  pre- 
ferred by  Luther  and  many  others,  is  consistent  with  the 
meaning  of  the  words,  and  gives  a  good  sense.  He  acted  in 
the  person  of  Christ,  i.  e.  as  his  representative  and  by  his  au- 
thority. This  idea,  however,  is  commonly  expressed  by  the 
phrase  in  the  name  of  Christ.  1  Cor.  5,  4.  Calvin  prefers 
the  former  view,  and  adds,  Christ  is  to  be  placed  before  us,  or 
we  "  are  to  act  as  in  his  presence,  for  nothing  is  better  adapt- 
ed to  incline  us  to  mercy."  No  man  can  be  severe  in  his 
judgment  who  feels  that  the  mild  eyes  of  Christ  are  fixed 
upon  him. 

The  word  xapt^o/^at,  rendered  to  forgive  in  this  verse,  is  a 
deponent  verb,  but  is,  in  several  of  its  forms,  used  in  a  passive 
sense.  It  is  so  taken  here  by  Rilckert  and  Meyer,  who  give 
an  entirely  different  explanation  of  the  passage.  They  adopt 
the  reading  of  Griesbach,  given  in  the  margin,  and  render  jrt 
thus :  '  I  forgive — for  what  I  have  been  forgiven,  if  I  have 
been  forgiven  anything,  it  is  for  your  sake.'  That  is,  if  God 
has  really  pardoned  my  great  sin  in  persecuting  Christ,  it  was 
for  your  sake.  Comp.  1  Tim.  1,  16.  But  this  interpretation 
is  inconsistent  with  the  common  use  of  the  word,  with  the 
whole  context,  and  with  Paul's  manner  of  speaking.  His  hu- 
mility manifested  itself  in  deep  remorse  and  repentance  for  his 
past  conduct,  but  not  in  doubting  whether  he  had  been  for- 
given. Besides,  this  inte]-pretation  v/ould  require  a  very  un- 
natural explanation  of  the  folio ^dng  clause.     '  If  I  have  been 


II.   CORINTHIANS  2,  11-13.  41 

forgiven  for  your  sake  in  the  presence  of  Christ^''  that  is, 
Christ  is  the  witness  of  my  being  forgiven.  This  is  contrary 
to  all  scriptural  representations.  God  is  said  to  forgive  for 
Christ's  sake ;  and  Christ  is  said  to  forgive,  but  he  is  never 
represented  as  the  mere  witness  or  spectator  of  our  for- 
giveness. 

11.  Lest  Satan  should  get  an  advantage  of  us  :  for 
we  are  not  ignorant  of  his  devices. 

This  verse,  as  above  remarked,  is  by  some  made  to  depend 
on  V.  8,  the  vs.  9  and  10  being  parenthetical.  'Confirm  your 
love  towards  him — lest  Satan  should  get  an  advantage  of  us.' 
Others  make  it  depend  on  the  preceding  words,  '  We  should 
act  (or,  I  was  pardoned)  in  the  presence  of  Christ,  lest,'  &c. 
The  most  natural  connection  is  with  the  first  clause  of  v.  10, 
which  contains  the  main  idea  of  the  context.  'I  will  join  you 
in  pardoning  the  offender  lest  Satan  get  an  advantage  of  us,' 
i.  e.  make  a  gain  of  us.  The  expression  is  jxr]  irXeoveKT-q^uiixcv 
vTTo  Tov  aaravd,  lest  we  should  be  made  c^in  of,  or  defrauded,  by 
Satan.  It  was  a  gain  to  Satan  if  either  an  individual  soul 
could  be  driven  to  despair,  or  the  peace  of  the  church  could 
be  disturbed.  Both  of  these  evils  were  to  be  apprehended  if 
discipline  were  carried  too  far.  This  dread  of  Satan  was  not 
chimerical  or  unreasonable,  for  he  really  does  seek  to  turn 
every  thing  to  the  disadvantage  of  Christ  and  his  kingdom. 
We  are  not  ignorant,  says  the  apostle,  of  his  devices.  This 
and  similar  passages  of  the  Word  of  God  teach  that  Satan  is 
a  personal  behig;  that  he  exerts  great  influence  over  the 
minds  of  men ;  that  although  finite,  and,  therefore,  not  ubiqui- 
tous, he  is  nevertheless  represented  as  operating  on  the  minds 
of  men  generally,  and  not  merely  on  those  in  any  one  place. 
His  powers  of  intelligence  and  agency  therefore  must  be  great 
beyond  our  conceptions.  No  individual  and  no  community 
can  ever  be  sure  that  he  is  not  plotting  their  destruction. 
Paul  might  have  said  to  the  Romans  or  the  Ephesians,  as  he 
did  to  the  Corinthians,  that  they  must  take  heed  lest  Satan 
make  a  gain  of  them,  and  in  some  way  secure  them  as  his  own. 

12.  13.  Furthermore,  when  I  came  to  Troas  to 
(preach)  Christ" s  gospel,  and  a  door  was  opened  to  me 
01  the  Lord,  I  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit  because  I  found 


42  II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  12.13. 

not  Titus  my  brother ;  but  taking  my  leave  of  them,  1 
went  from  thence  into  Macedonia. 

Furthermore^  when  I  came ;  literally,  But  having  come. 
The  particle  hi  {but)  serves  to  resume  the  connection  broken 
by  the  digression,  vs.  5-11.  In  v.  4  he  said  he  had  written 
his  former  letter  in  great  anguish  and  distress  of  heart,  to 
manifest  his  love  for  them.  And  as  a  still  further  proof  of 
the  deep  interest  ^\hich  he  took  in  their  welfare,  he  refers  to 
the  incident  mentioned  in  these  verses.  In  execution  of  his 
plan  of  going  from  Ephesus  through  Macedonia  to  Corinth,  1 
Cor,  16,  5,  Paul  came  to  Troas^  literally,  to  the  Troad  (ct?  t>)v 
TpojaSa),  a  name  given  to  the  whole  district  around  the  site  of 
ancient  Troy.  The  city  itself  was  on  the  coast  of  Mysia  oppo- 
site to  the  island  of  Tenedos.  It  had  been  made  a  Roman 
colony  by  Augustus,  and  was  a  place  of  considerable  impor- 
tance, in  constant  commercial  intercourse  with  the  cities  of 
Macedonia  and  Greece.  Paul  did  not  intend  to  make  a  rapid 
journey  to  Corinth,  but  a  regular  missionary  tour ;  he  there- 
fore says  he  came  to  Troas  to  preach  GhrisVs  gospel^  i.  e.  the 
gospel  of  which  Christ  is  the  author.  It  is  also  called  the 
gospel  of  God,  and  Paul  speaks  of  it  as  his  gospel,  i.  e.  the 
gospel  which  he  preached.  When  spoken  of  as  the  gospel 
of  the  kingdom  of  God^  Matt.  4,  23,  the  gospel  of  salvation^ 
Eph.  1,  13,  of  peace^  Eph.  6,  15,  the  genitive  expresses  either 
the  subject  of  which  the  gospel  treats  or  the  effects  which  it 
produces.  And  a  door  was  opened  to  we,  i.  e.  a  way  of  ac- 
cess, an  opening  to  labour  with  effect.  Of  the  Lord^  accord- 
ing to  this  interpretation  the  woi'ds,  Iv  KvpLo),  are  to  be  connect- 
ed with  the  immediately  preceding  participle,  "  door  opened 
by  the  Lord."  See  1  Cor.  15,  58.  Gal.  5,  10.  Eph.  2,  21.  It 
is,  however,  more  in  accordance  with  Paul's  style,  who  so 
frequently  uses  these  words  in  such  expressions  as  '  work  in 
the  Lord,'  '  temple  in  the  Lord,'  '  fellow-labourer  in  the  Lord,' 
to  refer  them  to  the  whole  clause.  "  There  was  an  open  door 
in  the  Lord."  The  kind  of  door  is  thus  indicated,  or  the 
sphere  of  labour  pointed  out.  It  was  an  opportunity  for  la- 
bouring successfully  in  the  Lord's  service.  Though  the  pros- 
pects were  so  favourable,  Paul  says,  I  had  no  rest  m  m,g 
spirit/  Tto  TTvevfxaTL  /.tou,  for  my  spirit.  The  word  spirit  ii 
liere  used  because  it  is  the  highest  term  to  designate  the  soul^ 
Rom.  8,  16,  and  the  anxiety  or  distress  which  the  apostle  ex- 
perienced concerned  the  highest  feelings  of  his  nature,     J)e* 


II.   CORINTHIANS   2,  14.  43 

cause  I  found  not  Titus  my  brother.  He  calls  Titus  his  broth- 
er, both  because  of  his  relation  to  him  as  a  fellow-Christian, 
and  because  he  was  a  joint  labourer  with  him  in  the  gospel. 
He  expected  to  meet  Titus  at  Troas,  and  to  learn  from  him  the 
state  of  things  in  Corintli,  and  especially  the  eiFect  produced 
by  his  former  letter.  It  seems  that  he  regarded  this  as  a 
turning  point  in  the  history  of  that  church.  If  they  submitted 
to  his  authority  and  corrected  the  abuses  which  he  had  point- 
ed out,  and  especially  if  they  excommunicated  the  member 
guilty  of  the  unheard-of  offence  so  often  referred  to  in  this 
chapter,  then  he  had  hopes  of  their  stabiUty  in  faith  and  prog- 
ress in  holiness.  But  if  they  refused  to  regard  his  injunctions, 
and  persisted  in  the  course  on  which  they  had  entered,  then  he 
foresaw  their  speedy  destruction.  So  much  was  at  stake  that 
he  could  not  endure  the  state  of  suspense  which  he  was  in ; 
and  therefore,  taking  leave  of  them^  that  is,  of  the  brethren  in 
Troas,  he  passed  over  into  Macedonia.  On  his  tirst  visit  to  this 
city,  Paul  was  prevented  from  remaining  by  a  vision,  from  which 
he  gathere'd  that  the  Lord  called  him  to  preach  the  gospel  in 
Macedonia.  Acts  16,  8.  And  on  his  return  from  his  present 
journey,  it  is  said,  he  sailed  from  Philippi  and  came  in  five  days 
to  Troas,  and  abode  there  seven  days.  Acts  20,  6.  From  the 
circumstances  connected  with  this  last  visit  it  is  evident  that 
there  was  an  established  church  at  tliat  time  in  Troas.  The 
word  aTTOTao-o-o/xat,  to  take  leave  of  means  to  separate  oneself 
from,  to  bid  tare  well  to.  Luke  16,  61.  Acts  18,  18.  21.  1 
went  from  thence  into  Macedonia ;  c^A^^oi/,  I  icent  forth. 
He  crossed  over  the  northeastern  corner  of  the  Mediterranean 
sea  to  one  of  the  ports  of  Macedonia;  the  same  voyage  which 
lie  made  on  his  return,  which  then  required  five  days.  As 
Titus  was  to  return  from  Corinth  through  Macedonia  to  Troas, 
Paul  thus  went  to  meet  him  on  his  journey. 

14.  Now  thanks  (be)  unto  God,  which  always  caus- 
eth  us  to  triumph  in  Christ,  and  maketh  manifest  the 
savour  of  his  knowledge  by  us  in  every  place. 

Agreeably  to  the  impulsive  character  of  this  epistle,  in 
stead  of  stating  what  was  the  intelligence  which  he  received 
from  Titus,  the  apostle  breaks  out  into  a  thanksgiving  to  God, 
which  assumes  a  form  which  might  be  taken  for  selt-commen- 
dation,  which  he,  however,  disclaims,  and  humbly  acknowl- 
edges that  all  his  qualifications  for  his  work,  and  all  his  success 


44  II.   C0RI:N^THIANS   2,  14. 

ill  it,  are  to  be  attributed  to  God.  This  leads  him  to  speal< 
of  the  ministry  of  the  gospel,  which  hie  contrasts  with  that  of 
the  law,  and  himself  with  Moses,  so  that  it  is  not  until  the 
seventh  chapter  that  he  pauses,  as  it  were,  to  take  breath,  and 
resumes  the  narrative  here  broken  oif.  The  thing  for  which 
the  apostle  gives  thanks  is  his  success;  which  inckides  both 
his  triumph  over  obstacles  and  enemies,  and  his  efficiency  in 
spreading  abroad  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  The  word 
Spiafx^iveiv^  rendered  here  to  cause  to  triumph^  means  to  tri- 
imiph  over^  to  lead  in  triumph.  This  is  its  uniform  sense  in 
the  classics,  and  it  is  so  used  by  Paul  in  Col.  2,  5.  Meyer 
and  others  so  render  the  word  here.  '  Thanks  be  to  God  who 
triumphs  over  us,'  i.  e.  who  disappoints  our  fears  and  puts  our 
anxieties  to  shame.  But  this  is  evidently  incongruous.  Paul 
does  not  represent  himself  as  humbled  and  conquered,  but  just 
the  reverse.  Calvin  and  others  retain  the  literal  meaning  of 
the  word,  and  say  the  sense  is,  '  Tiianks  be  to  God  who  leads 
us  in  triumph,  not  as  captives,  but  as  sharers  of  his  victory.' 
This  gives  a  suitable  meaning,  but  is  not  so  consistent  with 
the  use  of  the  word,  which  means  to  triimipli  over^  not,  to 
make  one  a  sharer  in  our  triumph.  The  great  majority  of 
commentators  therefore  modify  the  sense  of  the  word  as  is 
done  by  our  translators.  This  they  justify  by  referring  to  the 
fact  tliat  many  verbs  which  in  ordinary  Greek  are  neuter,  in 
the  Hellenistic  dialect  are  used  in  a  causative  sense  ( Winer^ 
p.  304),  as  fjLa^TjTevetv^  to  be  a  disciple,  in  Matt.  28,  19  and  else- 
where, means  to  make  diseijyles  j  ^aa-Lkevuv,  to  reign,  in  1  Sam. 
8,  22,  and  often  in  the  Septuagint,  means  to  cause  to  reign ; 
and  thus  ^pta/x/5euetv,  to  triumph,  may  in  obedience  to  the  con- 
text be  fairly  rendered,  to  cause  to  triumph.  In  Christ,  in  virtue 
of  union  with  Christ,  or,  as  united  to  him.  These  words  de- 
termine the  nature  of  the  triumph  of  which  the  apostle  speaks. 
It  was  the  triumph  of  a  Christian  minister  in  the  service  of 
Christ. 

And  maketh  manifest  the  savour  of  his  knowledge,  i.  e. 
diffuses  or  spreads  abroad  his  knowledge,  which  is  compared 
to  the  savour  of  a  sacrifice  (Gen.  8,  21.  Eph.  5,  2.  Phil.  4,  18), 
or  to  incense.  His  knowledge  ;  the  pronoun  his  is  commonly 
referred  to  God,  but  as  thiB  clause  is  explanatory  of  the  for- 
mer, or  an  ami)lification  of  the  idea  therein  expressed,  it  is 
perhaps  better  to  refer  it  to  Christ.  '  He  causes  us  to  triumph 
in  Chiist,  and  to  spread  abroad  the  savour  of  his  knowledge/ 
i.  e.  the  knowledge  of  Christ.     That  Christ  should  be  known 


II.   CORIXTIIIANS   2,  15.  45 

\?as  the  great  end  of  Paul's  mission,  and  is  of  all  tliins^s  the 
most  acceptable  to  God.  Knowledge  here,  as  so  often  else- 
whore  in  Scripture,  means  not  merely  intellectual  cognition, 
but  spiritual  apprehension  and  recognition.  That  men  sliould 
know  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  the  sense  of  recognizing,  loving 
and  worshipping  him  as  God  manifest  m  the  flesh,  is  the  con- 
summation of  redemption  ;  the  sum  of  all  blessedness  and  ex- 
cellence. In  every  place.  Wherever  Paul  went,  there  the 
knowledge  of  Christ  was  spread  abroad.  Comp.  Rom.  15,  19, 
Can  this  be  said  of  us  ? 

15.  Eor  we  are  unto  God  a  sweet  savour  of  Christ, 
in  them  that  are  saved,  and  in  them  that  perish. 

We  as  ministers,  and  our  work  of  preaching  Christ,  are  ac- 
ceptable to  God,  whatever  may  be  the  result  of  our  labours. 
This  idea  is  connected  with  the  preceding  as  an  amplitication 
and  confirmation.  'God  by  us  diffuses  the  knowledge  of 
Christ  everywhere  as  a  savour;  ,/or  (or t,  because)  it  is  well 
pleasing  to  God  whatever  be  the  t'flect  which  it  produces.' 
There  is,  as  is  so  common  in  Paul's  epistles,  a  slight  change  in 
the  figure.  In  v.  14  the  knowledge  of  Christ  is  declared  to 
be  a  savour  as  of  incense,  here  the  apostle  is  the  sweet  savour. 
But  it  is  the  apostle  not  as  a  man,  not  the  purity  or  devotion 
of  his  life ;  but  the  apostle  as  a  preacher  of  the  gospel,  and 
therefore  the  gospel  which  he  preached  ;  so  that  the  thought 
remains  the  same.  In  both  verses  the  diffusion  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  Christ  is  said  to  be  well  pleasing  to  God.  Savour  of 
Christy  does  not  mean  a  savour  of  which  Christ  is  the  author. 
The  idea  is  not  that  Christ  rendered  Paul  or  his  life  accepta- 
ble to  God.  That  indeed  is  true,  but  it  is  not  what  is  intend- 
ed. When  we  speak  of  the  perfume  of  the  rose,  or  of  the  vio- 
let, we  mean  that  perfume  which  the  rose  or  the  violet  emits 
and  which  is  characteristic  of  it.  When  Paul  says,  "  We  are 
a  sweet  smelling  savour  of  Christ,"  he  means  we  are  the  means 
of  diffusing  the  knowledge  of  Christ.  When  a  man's  garments 
are  perfumed  with  myrrh  or  frankin(iense,  he  fills  with  the  fra- 
grance every  place  he  enters.  So  Paul,  wherever  he  went, 
diffused  abroad  the  fragrance  of  the  name  of  Christ,  and  that 
was  acceptable  to  God.  In  theni^  i.  e.  among  them,  that  are 
saved ;  and  in  (among)  thein  that  perish.  This  does  not  mean 
among  them  predestined  to  be  saved,  and  those  predestined 
to  perish.    The  idea  of  predestination  is  not  included.    Th« 


40  II.   CORINTHIAN'S   2,  16. 

two  classes  are  designated  ah  eventu.  The  .s:ospel  and  those 
who  preach  it  are  well  pleasing  to  God,  whether  men  receive 
it  and  are  saved,  or  reject  it  and  are  lost.  The  light  is  inesti- 
mably precious,  whether  the  eye  rejoices  in  it,  or  through  dis- 
ease is  destroyed  by  it.     Comp.  1  Cor.  1,  18.  2  Thess.  2,  10. 

16.  To  the  one  (we  are)  the  savour  of  death  unto 
death;  to  the  other  the  savour  of  hfe  unto  Hfe.  And 
\v\\o  is  sufficient  for  these  things  ? 

The  words  we  are  are  not  in  the  text,  but  are  necessarily 
implied.  The  apostle  and  all  faithful  ministers  are  to  God  an 
eucoSta,  a  sweet  savour^  to  men  an  6cr//->7,  a  savour^  salutary  or 
destructive  according  to  circumstances.  We  are^  i.  e.  we  as, 
preachers.  The  idea  is  the  same  whether  we  say  that  preach- 
ers of  the  gospel,  or  the  gospel  itself,  or  Christ,  are  the  cause 
of  life  to  some,  and  of  death  to  others.  As  Christ  is  to  some 
a  tried  corner  stone,  elect  and  precious,  the  rock  of  their  sal- 
vation, to  others  he  is  a  stone  of  offence.  1  Pet.  2,  7.  8.  So 
the  gospel  and  its  ministers  are  the  cause  of  life  to  some,  and 
of  death  to  others,  and  to  all  they  are  either  the  one  or  the 
other.  The  word  of  God  is  quick  and  powerful  either  to  save 
or  to  destroy.  It  cannot  be  neutral.  If  it  does  not  save,  it 
destroys.  "This  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into 
the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than  light,"  John 
3,  19.  "If  I  had  not  ccme  and  spoken  unto  them  they  had 
not  had  sin,"  John  15,  22.  If  a  man  rejects  the  gospel,  it  had 
been  far  better  for  him  never  to  have  heard  it.  It  will  be 
more  tolerable  for  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment than  for  him.  This,  which  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible, 
is  plainly  the  doctrine  of  this  passage.  The  gospel  and  those 
who  preach  it,  are  either  a  savour  of  life  or  a  savour  of  death. 
If  not  the  one,  they  must  be  the  other.  In  the  phrase  "a 
savour  of  death  unto  death,"  of  death  expresses  the  quality, 
unto  deaths  the  effect.  It  is  a  deadly  savour,  and  it  produces 
death.  And  so  of  the  corresponding  clause,  "  a  savour  of  life 
unto  life,"  is  a  salutary  savour  producing  life.  The  Rabbins 
often  use  a  similar  expression  in  reference  to  the  Law,  which 
they  say  is  either  an  odour  of  life  or  of  death. 

On  tlie  authority  of  two  of  the  older  MSS.  (A  and  C),  and 
several  of  the  more  modern  ones,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf  and 
Meyer  j-ead  e/c  ^avarov  and  U  tjirq^  instead  of  the  simple  geni* 


II.   CORIXTHIANS   2,  17.  47 

live.  It  is  then  not  a  savour  of  death  or  of  life^  but  a  savour 
arising  from  death,  and  a  savour  arising  from  life.  To  the 
one  class  Christ  is  dead  and  yields  only  a  savour  of  death ;  to 
the  other,  he  is  alive,  and  yields  a  savour  of  life.  According 
to  either  reading  the  main  idea  is  the  same.  Christ  and  his 
gospel,  and  therefore  his  ministers,  are  to  believers  the  source 
of  life,  and  to  unbelievers  the  source  of  death.  See  Matt.  21, 
44.  Luke  2,  34.  John  9,  39.  The  common  text  has  more  ex- 
ternal authority,  and  certainly  gives  a  simpler  sense,  and  is 
therefore  preferred  by  the  majority  of  editors. 

And  loho  is  sufficient  for  these  things  f  Kat  (and)  before 
a  question  often  indicates  a  consequence  of  what  precedes. 
It  is  frequently  in  our  version  in  such  cases  rendered  the^i. 
"  Who  then  can  be  saved  ?  "  Mark  10,  26.  "  How  is  he  then 
David's  son  ?  "  Luke  20,  44.  So  here.  Who  then  is  sufficient 
for  these  things  ?  If  the  work  is  so  great,  if  eternal  life  or 
eternal  death  must  follow  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  who 
then  is  sufficient  (iKavos)  for  so  responsible  a  calling?  The 
most  natural  answer  to  this  question  would  seem  to  be,  '  No 
one  in  himself.'  The  following  verse,  however,  which  begins 
with  (yap)  fo}\  and  is  designed  to  confirm  the  implied  answer, 
requires  that  answer  to  be,  "  I  am."  '  I  am  sufficient  for  this 
work,  for  I  do  not  handle  the  word  of  God  deceitfully.' 
"My  sufficiency,"  however,  the  apostle  immediately  adds,  3, 
5,  "  is  of  God."  Of  himself  he  was  not  fit  or  able  to  do  any 
thing.  There  is,  as  Calvin  remarks,  an  implied  antithesis. 
*The  object  of  preaching  is  the  difi'usion  of  the  knowledge  of 
Christ ;  the  effect  of  that  diffusion  is  life  to  some  and  death  to 
others.  Who  then  is  competent  to  this  work?  Not  your 
false  teachers  who  corrupt  the  word  of  God,  but  I  and  others 
who  preach  the  pure  gospel  from  pure  motives.'  This  view  is 
sustained  by  what  follows,  for  the  apostle  immediately  pro- 
ceeds to  vindicate  his  claim  to  this  sufficiency  or  fitness,  which 
he  denies  to  the  false  teachers. 


17.  For  we  are  not  as  many,  whicli  corrupt  the 
word  of  God ;  but  as  of  sincerity,  but  as  of  God,  as  in 
the  sight  of  God,  speak  we  in  Christ. 

The  connection  indicated  by  for  is  obvious.     '  We   are 
competent  to  this  work,  for  we  are  not  like  the  false  teachers, 
but  are  sincere.'     We  are  not  as  many^  ol  ttoXXol,  the  many. 
3 


«8  II.    CORIXTIIIANS   2,  17. 

This  some  understand  to  mean  the  mass  or  mnjority  of  those 
who  .preach  the  gospel.  The  apostle  would  thus  be  made  to 
condemn,  as  corrupters  of  the  faith,  the  great  body  of  the  min- 
isters of  the  apostolic  church.  This,  however,  is  unnecessary. 
Tlie  many,  means  the  definite  many  Icnown  to  the  Corinthians 
as  false  teachers,  to  v,  horn  in  the  course  of  this  epistle  the 
apostle  so  often  refers.  Which  corrupt  the  word  of  God. 
The  word  used  is  KairqX^vu),  to  be  a  huckster,  and  then  to  act 
as  one.  Paul  says,  We  do  not  act  as  hucksters  in  reference 
to  the  word  of  God.  The  word  is  frequently  used  in  the 
Greek  writers  in  a  figurative  sense,  to  express  the  ideas  of  adul- 
terating, and  of  making  merchandise  of  any  thing  for  the  sake  of 
gain.  Both  ideas  may  be  united,  for  both  are  included  in  the 
disclaimer  of  the  apostle.  He  neither  adulterated  the  word 
of  God,  by  mixing  it  with  Judaism  or  false  philosophy  (i.  e. 
wath  his  own  speculations),  nor  did  he  use  it  for  any  selfish  or 
mercenary  purpose.  J^ut  as  of  sincerity.  The  ((is)  as,  is  not 
redundant.  The  meaning  is,  'We  speak  as  those  who  are 
sincere,'  i.  e.  those  whose  characteristic  is  ctXiKptVcta,  transpar- 
ent purity,  or  integrity ;  who  can  bear  being  looked  through 
and  through ;  all  whose  motives  will  sustain  inspection.  As 
of  God,  not  merely  sent  of  God,  but  godly,  influenced  by 
God,  and  belonging  to  God,  and  therefore  like  him.  Our 
Lord  said  to  the  Jews,  "He  which  is  of  God,  heareth  God's 
words:  ye  therefore  hear  them  not  because  ye  are  not  of 
God,"  Jolui  8,  47.  As  in  the  sight  of  God,  i.  e.  as  in  his 
presence  and  conscious  of  his  inspection.  We  speak  ^?^  Christ ; 
not  of  Christ,  nor,  according  to  Christ,  but  in  communion  with 
him,  as  a  member  of  his  body  and  actuated  by  his  Spirit.  We 
have  here  then  Paul's  description  of  a  faithful  minister,  of  one 
who  is  (iKavds)  sufficient,  or  quahticd  for  the  fearful  responsi- 
bility of  being  a  savour  of  life  or  of  death.  He  does  not  cor- 
rupt the  word  of  God  by  any  foreign  admixtures,  nor  use  it  as 
a  means  of  his  own  advancement  by  dispensing  it  so  as  to  please 
men;  but  he  is  governed  by  pure  motives,  is  of  God,  and 
speaks  as  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  as  a  true  Christian 
man. 


II.   CORINTHIANS  3,  1.  49 


CHAPTER  in. 

The  apostle  shows  that  he  does  not  need  to  commend  himself  or  to  be  conr 
mended  by  the  Corinthians ;  that  God  had  qualified  him  for  the  work  of 
a  minister  of  the  new,  and  not  of  the  old  covenant,  vs.  1-11.     He  ex- 
ercised his  ministry  in  accordance  with  the  peculiar  character  of  the  new 
dispensation,  vs.  12-18. 

Proof  of  the  Apostle's  fitness  for  his  worJc^  and  its  nature. 
Vs.  1-11. 

Although  the  concluding  paragraph  of  the  preceding  chap- 
ter contained  a  strong  assertion  of  the  integrity  and  fidelity 
of  the  apostle,  he  says,  it  was  not  written  for  the  purpose  of 
self-commendation.  He  needed  no  commendation  from  any 
source,  v.  1.  The  Corinthians  themselves  were  his  commen- 
dation. Their  conversion  was  an  epistle  of  Christ  a^athenti- 
cating  his  mission  and  his  fidelity,  which  all  men  could  read, 
vs.  2.  3.  His  fitness  or  sufficiency  for  his  work  was  due  in  no 
measure  to  himself,  but  to  God,  who  had  endowed  him  with 
the  qualifications  of  a  minister  of  the  new  covenant,  vs.  4-6. 
This  covenant  and  its  ministry  are  far  superior  to  the  old 
covenant  and  the  ministry  of  Moses,  because  the  one  was  a 
ministry  of  death,  the  other  of  life  ;  the  one  was  of  condemna- 
tion, the  other  of  righteousness;  the  glory  of  the  one  was 
transient,  the  glory  of  the  other  is  abiding,  vs.  7-11. 

1.  Do  we  begin  again  to  commend  ourselves?  or 
need  we,  as  some  (others),  epistles  of  commendation  to 
you,  or  (letters)  of  commendation  from  you  ? 

Many  of  the  pecuUarities  of  this  epistle  are  due  to  the  fact 
that  at  the  time  of  writing  it  the  apostle's  mind  was  filled 
with  conflicting  feelings.  On  the  one  hand,  he  was  filled  w^ith 
gratitude  to  God  and  love  to  the  Corinthians  on  account  of 
their  repentsnce  and  ready  obedience ;  and  on  the  other,  with 
feelings  of  indignation  at  the  perverse  and  wicked  course 
adopted  by  the  false  teachers  in  Corinth.  Hence  even  in  the 
expression  of  the  former  class  of  feelings,  he  is  interrupted  or 
turned  aside  by  the  thought  that  his  opponents  were  on  the 
watch  to  turn  every  thing  to  his  disadvantage.  Thus  although 
there  was  nothing  of  a  spirit  of  self-commendation  in  his  thank- 


60  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  2. 

ing  God  for  causing  him  to  triumph,  or  in  the  assertion  of  his 
sincerity,  in  1,  15-17,  yet  he  knew  that  his  enemies  would  put 
that  construction  on  what  he  had  said.  He  seems  to  hear 
til  em  say,  '  He  is  commending  himself  again.'  It  is  plain  from 
the  use  of  the  word  again  in  this  connection,  that  the  charge 
of  praising  himself  had  before  been  made  against  the  apostle, 
whether  founded  on  his  former  epistle  or  what  he  said  on 
other  occasions,  is  unceitain  and  unimportant. 

The  authorities  are  divided  as  to  whether  17  ^-q  or  d  fxrj  is 
the  true  reading  in  the  following  clause.  If  the  former,  the 
sense  is,  "Or  do  we  need,"  &c. ;  if  the  latter,  "Unless  we 
need,"  &g.  The  latter  gives  an  ironical  turn  to  the  passage. 
The  apostle  sets  it  forth  as  certain  that  his  apostolic  mission 
and  authority  were  so  authenticated,  that  he  did  not  need,  as 
certain  people  did,  letters  of  commendation  either  to  them  or 
from  them.  These  false  teachers  had  no  doubt  gained  access 
to  Corinth  on  the  strength  of  certain  letters  of  recommenda- 
tion. They  were  so  little  known  and  had  so  little  character, 
that  when  they  went  elsewhere,  they  would  need  to  be  com- 
mended by  the  Corinthians.  With  Paul  the  case  was  dif- 
ferent. 

2.  Ye  are  our  epistle  written  in  our  hearts,  known 
and  read  of  all  men. 

Te  are  our  epistle,  dtc,  or.  The  epistle  lohich  loe  have  ye 
are.  You  as  Christians,  your  conversion  is,  as  it  w^ere,  a  letter 
from  Christ  himself  authenticating  our  mission  and  fidelity. 
Writte7i  in  our  hearts.  The  plural  form,  our  hearts,  may  be 
explained  either  on  the  assumption  that  the  apostle  is  speak- 
ing of  Timothy  as  well  as  of  himself;  or  on  the  ground  that 
he  says  hearts  instead  of  heart  for  the  same  reason  that  he 
says  We  instead  of  I ;  or  that  the  word  is  used  figuratively 
for  the  affections.  It  is  not  Paul's  manner  to  make  his  asso- 
ciates the  joint  authors  of  his  letters,  and  in  no  one  of  his 
epistles  does  he  speak  more  out  of  the  fulness  of  his  personal 
feelings  than  he  does  in  this.  It  was  not  Timothy  who  Avas 
accused  of  self  commendation,  who  needed  no  letters  of  com- 
mendation, and  it  was  not  of  Timothy's  mission  that  the  con- 
version of  the  Corintliians  was  the  authentication,  and  there- 
fore it  was  not  in  Timothy's  heart  that  the  epistle  referred  to 
was  written.  Paul  is  speaking  of  himself.  A  thing  is  said  to 
be  written  in  the  heart  when  it  is  a  matter  of  consciousness; 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  3.  51 

when  it  is  a  matter  of  subjective,  as  distinguished  from  ob- 
jective knowledge.  Thus  the  law  of  God  is  said  to  be  written 
on  the  heart  when  the  knowledge  of  it  is  inward  and  not 
merely  outward.  Jer.  31,  33.  H^b.  8,  10.  Rom.  2,  15.  Any 
thing  of  which  a  man  is  certain,  or  of  Avhich  he  has  a  convic- 
tion founded  upon  his  inward  experience,  may  be  said  to  be 
Avritten  on  his  heart.  That  the  Corinthians  were  his  epistle 
was  to  the  apostle  a  matter  of  consciousness.  It  was  a  letter 
written  on  his  heart  which  he  could  neither  misunderstand 
nor  be  ignorant  of.  Comp.  Rom.  10,  8.  Any  thing  also  that 
is  very  dear  to  us  is  said  to  be  written  on  the  heart,  or  to  be 
in  the  heart.  So  Paul  says  to  the  Corinthians,  "  Ye  are  in  our 
hearts,"  V,  3.  The  apostle  therefore  may  be  understood  to 
mean  either  that  he  was  perfectly  certain  that  the  conversion 
of  the  Corinthians  was  for  him  a  letter  of  commendation ;  or 
that  it  was  most  dear  to  him.  A  letter  cherished  in  his  heart. 
The  context  is  in  favour  of  making  the  former  idea  the  promi- 
nent one.  This  letter,  however,  was  not  only  well  known  to 
the  apostle,  it  was  known  and  read  of  all  men.  It  was  a  pal- 
pable evidence  of  his  divine  mission,  Avhich  no  one  could  be 
ignorant  of,  and  which  no  one  could  gainsay.  Men  could  not 
doubt  its  genuineness,  nor  could  they  question  its  import. 
He  expresses  the  same  idea  when  he  says,  "  The  seal  of  my 
apostleshi^)  are  ye  in  the  Lord,"  1  Cor.  9,  2. 

3.  (Forasmuch  as  ye  are)  manifestly  declared  to  be 
the  epistle  of  Christ  ministered  by  us,  written  not  witli 
ink,  but  with  the  Spirit  of  the  living  God ;  not  in  ta- 
bles of  stone,  but  in  fleshly  tables  of  the  heart. 

The  fact  that  the  Corinthians  were  to  Paul  an  epistle  of 
commendation,  is  here  confirmed ;  v/xeis — c^avepou/^evot  on  lare^ 
ye  are  conspicuous  or  publicly  known  as  the  epistle  of  Christ, 
That  is,  an  epistle  of  which  Christ  is  the  author.  Ministered 
by  us.  The  conversion  of  the  Corinthians  was  the  work  of 
Christ,  eifected  by  the  ministry  of  Paul.  Considered  as  a  let- 
ter, they  were  a  letter  of  Christ  wi'itten  by  the  hand  of  Paul 
as  Christ's  instrument.  The  importance  or  superior  worth  of 
this  epistle  is  set  forth  in  what  follows  by  a  twofold  contrast 
or  comparison.  First,  it  Avas  not  a  letter  written  with  ink, 
but  by  the  Spirit  of  the  living  God.  Any  man  could  write 
with  ink;    Christ  alone  can  Av^rite  with  the  Spirit  of  God. 


»2  II.   CORINTHIANS  3,  4. 

This  is  a  figurative  way  of  expressing  the  idea  that  the  cotij 
version  of  the  Corinthians  was  a  divine,  supernatural  work, 
and  therefore  an  irrefragable  proof  that  Paul,  by  ^vhose  in- 
strmnentality  the  work  was  effected,  v/as  the  minister  of 
Christ.  This  was  a  letter,  therefore,  infinitely  above  smy  or- 
dinaiy  letter  written  with  ink.  Secondly,  it  was  not  an  out- 
ward, but  an  inward,  spiritual  work.  The  decalogue,  written 
on  tables  of  stone  by  the  finger  of  God,  was  indeed  a  di\ine 
work,  and  proved  the  divine  mission  of  Moses ;  but  what 
was  that  to  writing  the  law  upon  the  fleshly  tables  of  the 
heart !  The  work  of  regeneration  ;and  sanctification  is  always 
represented  in  the  Scripture  as  a  much  higher  manifestation 
of  divine  power  and  grace  than  any  mere  external  miracle. 
In  predicting  the  new  dispensation  in  contrast  with  the  old, 
God  says,  "  Behold  the  days  come  when  I  will  make  a  new 
covenant  with  the  house  of  Israel — not  according  to  the  cove- 
nant that  I  made  with  their  fathers, — but  I  will  put  my  law 
in  their  inward  parts,  and  write  it  in  their  hearts,"  Jeremiah 
31,  31-33.  To  this  the  apostle  evidently  refers  to  show  that 
the  evidence  of  his  mission  was  of  a  higher  character  than 
that  of  Moses,  and  that  his  ministry  was  far  more  exalted  and 
glorious. 

Instead  of  the  genitive,  KapS/as,  the  great  body  of  ancient 
MSS.  have  the  dative,  KapStai?;  on  tables  tvhich  are  hearts  of 
fleshy  instead  of  fleshly  tables  of  the  heart.  The  majority  of 
editors  adhere  to  the  common  text  on  the  authority  of  the 
Greek  fathers.     The  sense  is  the  same. 

4.  And   such   trust   have   we  throusfh   Christ   to 


O' 


God-ward. 

This  confidence  in  the  divinity  and  glory  of  his  mission, 
and  in  his  sufticiency  for  the  apostleship  he  had  from  Christ 
and  in  the  presence  of  God.  It  was  a  confidence  so  strong 
(and  yet  so  humble)  that  it  did  not  quail  even  under  the  eye 
of  God;  much  less  therefore  under  the  scrutiny  of  the  bleared 
eyes  of  his  opponents.  8uch  confidence.,  not  merely  confi- 
dence in  the  tact  that  the  Corinthians  were  to  him  a  letter  of 
commendation,  but  the  conlidcnce  expressed  in  the  whole 
cont(^xt,  and  especially  in  2,*15-17.  Tiiis  contidence  he  had 
throh'yh  Christ.  It  was  not  seli-contldence.  It  was  not  the 
consciousness  of  supeiior  excellence;  but  a  conviction  of  the 
truth  of  the  gospel  and  of  the  reality  of  that  vocation  which 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  5.  53 

he  had  received  from  Christ.  This  confidence  of  the  apostle 
that  he  was  what  God  had  called  him  to  be,  an  able  or  fit 
minister  of  the  gospel,  was  not  a  trait  of  natural  character ; 
it  was  not  a  conclusion  from  his  inward  and  outward  experi- 
ence ;  it  was  one  of  the  forms  in  which  the  Spirit  of  God 
which  was  in  him  manifested  itself;  just  as  that  Spirit  mani- 
fested itself  in  his  humility,  faith,  courage,  or  constancy.  It 
is  easy  to  determine  whether  such  confidence  is  self-inflation, 
or  the  strength  of  God  in  the  soul.  If  the  former,  it  has  its 
natural  concomitants  of  jDride,  arrogance,  indiflference,  con- 
tempt of  others.  If  the  latter,  it  is  attended  by  self-abhor- 
rence, meekness,  long-sufi*ering,  a  willingness  to  be  the  least 
tmd  lowest,  and  by  all  other  graces  of  the  Spirit.  To  God- 
icard^  TTpo?  rov  0€oV.  This  may  mean  in  reference  to  God,  i.  e. 
a  confidence  exercised  toward  God  as  its  object.  Or,  Trpos 
may  be  used  here  as  in  Rom.  4,  2.  Abraham,  it  is  there  said, 
had  no  i<avx^H-f^,  ground  of  boasting^  Trpo^  ©eoV,  before  God / 
that  is,  none  that  could  stand  his  inspection.  Paul  says  he 
had  a  confidence  before  God ;  that  is,  one  which  could  endure 
in  his  sight. 

5.  Not  that  we  are  sufficient  of  ourselves  to  think 
any  thing  as  of  ourselves ;  but  our  sufficiency  (is)  of 
God. 

The  apostle  had  strongly  asserted  his  sufficiency  or  fitness 
for  his  work.  He  here  tells  us  what  was  not,  and  then  what 
was,  the  source  of  his  sufiiciency.  JVot  that,  i.  e.  I  do  not  say, 
or,  I  do  not  mean,  that  we  are  suflScient  of  ourselves.  In  most 
of  the  older  MSS.  the  words  d<^'  eavrojv,  of  ourselves,  stand 
after  Xoyilaa-Sat  tl,  "  sufficient  to  think  any  thing  of  ourselves," 
instead  of,  as  in  the  common  text,  '  suflScient  of  ourselves  to 
think  anything.'  The  former  order  of  the  words  has  greater 
authority,  and  gives  perhaps  the  better  sense.  There  is  a  dif- 
ference in  the  prepositions  in  Greek  which  is  not  expressed  in 
the  English.  Paul  says  his  suflSciency  or  ability  to  think  any 
thing  was  not  acfi  kavriov  u)s  €^  eav-wv,  not  from  himself  as  out 
of  himself.  He  was  not  the  source  of  this  sufficiency  either 
remotely  or  immediately.  We  should  express  much  the  same 
idea  by  saying,  '  Our  sufficiency  is  not  hi  or  of  ourselves.' 
Comp.  Gal.  1,  1.  What  he  disclaims  is  sufficiency  or  ability 
to  think  a7iy  thing ;  the  implication  is  any  thing  right  or 


54  II.   CORINTHIAXS   3,  6. 

good.  He  had  no  power  of  himself  to  accomplish  any  thing. 
His  titness  for  his  work,  whether  consisting  in  knowledge,  or 
grace,  or  fidelity,  or  efficiency,  did  not  arise  ont  of  any  thing 
he  was  in  or  of  himself.  The  word  XoyiC^aa-^ai  does  not  here 
mean  to  judge^  or  to  think  out  or  determine.  The  idea  is  not 
that  Paul  w^as  of  himself  unahle  to  judge  wiiat  was  best  and 
right,  i.  e.  to  think  out  the  means  of  rendering  his  ministry 
successful.  The  word  is  to  be  taken  in  its  simplest  sense,  to 
think.  Thought  is  the  lowest  form  of  our  efficiency,  in  so  far 
as  it  is  much  easier  to  think  good,  than  either  to  will  or  to  do 
it.  Paul  means  to  say  that  so  far  as  the  subject  in  hand  is 
concerned,  he  could  do  nothing,  not  even  think.  He  was  in 
himself  absolutely  empty  and  powerless.  Our  sufficiency  is 
of  God.  All  our  fitness  for  our  work — all  our  knowledge, 
holiness  and  power  are  of  God.  They  are  neither  self-acquired 
nor  self-sustained.  I  am  nothing,  the  apostle  would  say ;  God 
in  me  is  every  thing.  The  same  truth  and  feeling  are  ex- 
pressed in  1  Cor.  15,  10. 

6.  Who  also  hath  made  us  able  ministers  of  the 
new  testament ;  not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the  spirit : 
for  the  letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  giveth  life. 

This  verse  is  a  confirmation  of  the  preceding.  The  relative 
OS  is  here  used  as  in  Luke  8,  13,  and  elsewhere,  as  implying 
the  cause  or  reason.  Our  sufficiency  is  of  God,  loho  ;  equiva- 
lent to  for  he  hath  made  us  able  ministers.  The  same  radical 
word  is  retained,  tKavcoo-e,  hath  rendered  us  iKavous,  sufficient^ 
able,  well  qualified,  ministers  of  the  new  testament^  Kaii^rj^ 
SiaS^^KYji^  of  the  7ieio  covenant,  as  the  word  BiaS^^^Kr)  always 
means  in  the  New  Testament,  unless  Heb  9,  16  be  an  excep- 
tion. The  covenant  formed  between  God  and  the  Hebrews 
at  Mount  Sinai  is  called  the  Old  Covenant ;  the  gospel  dis- 
pensation as  distinguished  from  the  Mosaic  is  called  the  New 
Covenant.  Matt.  26,  28.  1  Cor.  11,  25.  Heb.  8,  8.  9,  15.  &c. 
As,  however,  the  promises  of  the  gospel,  and  especially  the 
great  promise  of  redemption  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  underlay 
both  the  patriarchal  and  Mosaic  dispensations,  the  plan  of 
salvation  or  the  covenant  of  grace,  is  also  called  the  New 
Covenant,  although  older  than  the  Mosaic  covenant,  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  the  covenant  of  works  formed  with  Adam. 
This  gives  rise  to  no  little  obscurity.     It  is  not  always  easy  to 


II.    CORINTHIANS   3,  6.  55 

determine  whether  the  words  "new  covenant"  refer  to  the 
gospel  dispensation  introduced  by  Christ,  or  to  the  covenant 
of  grace  inaugurated  in  the  first  promise  made  to  our  fallen 
parents.  And  in  like  manner  it  is  not  easy  always  to  decide 
whether  the  words  the  "  old  covenant "  designate  the  Mosaic 
covenant  or  the  covenant  of  works.  The  context  must  in 
every  case  be  our  guide  in  deciding  these  questions.  In  the 
present  case  it  is  jjlain  that  by  the  New  Covenant  the  apostle 
means  the  gospel  as  distinguished  from  the  Law, — the  Chris- 
tian as  distinguished  from  the  Mosaic  dispensation.  It  was  of 
that  he  was  made  a  mini;«ter,  and  it  is  that  which  he  contrasts 
with  the  Old  Testament  economy.  Not  of  the  letter^  but  of 
the  spirit.  These  Avords  admit  of  two  constructions.  They 
may  depend  on  the  word  covenant.  '  Covenant  not  of  the 
letter,  but  of  the  spirit.'  They  thus  determine  the  nature  of 
the  New  Covenant  as  being  not  of  the  letter  but  of  the  spirit. 
This  is  the  construction  adopted  by  perhaps  the  majority  of 
modern  commentators.  The  older  interpreters,  followed  by 
our  translators,  make  the  words  in  question  depend  on  ininis- 
ters.  "  Ministers  not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the  spirit."  Tliis 
latter  is  not  only  more  familiar  to  the  readers  of  the  English 
version,  but  is  favoured  by  the  whole  context.  Paul  contrasts 
two  dispensations  ;  one  he  calls  the  letter,  the  other  the  spirit. 
He  says  he  is  minister  of  the  one,  not  of  the  other,  and  after- 
wards, vs.  7.  8,  he  speaks  of  the  ministry  of  death  and  min- 
istry of  the  spirit ;  the  ministry  of  condemnation  ond  the 
ministry  of  righteousness.  That  the  words  lette)'  and  sj)irit  as 
here  used  mean  the  law  and  the  gospel  is  plain,  first,  because 
it  is  the  law  and  the  gospel  which  he  proceeds  to  compare  in 
the  following  verses ;  and  secondly,  because  these  are  terms 
which  he  elsewhere  uses  in  the  same  sense.  Thus  in  Rom.  7, 
6  he  speaks  of  the  oldness  of  the  letter  and  newness  of  the 
spirit.  In  Rom.  2,  27  he  characterizes  the  Jew  as  being  of 
the  letter,  i.  e.  as  having  the  law.  Comp.  also  Gal.  3,  3.  If 
it  be  asked  what  is  the  ground  of  these  designations,  why  the 
law  is  called  letter,  and  the  gospel  s^nrit,  it  may  be  answered 
in  the  first  place,  that  the  law  is  called  ypa/^/xa,  letter,  for  the 
same  reason  that  it  is  called  ypa^^y,  scripture.  It  was  some- 
thing written.  Not  only  was  the  decalogue,  the  kernel  of  the 
Mosaic  economy,  originally  written  on  stones,  but  the  whole 
law  was  a  volume  known  as  the  ivritings.  And  in  the  second 
place,  the  law  as  written  was  something  external  and  object^ 
i-ve.  It  was  addressed  to  the  eye,  to  the  ear,  to  the  under- 
8* 


56  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  6. 

standing.  It  was  not  an  inward  principle  or  power.  It  held 
up  the  rule  of  duty  to  which  men  were  to  be  conformed,  but 
it  could  not  impart  the  disposition  or  abiUty  to  obey.  It  was, 
as  it  were,  a  mere  writing  or  book.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
gospel  is  spiritual,  as  distinguished  from  what  was  external 
and  ritual.  It  is  the  power  of  God,  Rom.  1,  6;  the  organ 
through  which  the  Spirit  v/orks  in  giving  life  to  the  soul. 
These  words  therefore  express  concisely  the  characteristic  dif- 
ference between  the  law  and  the  gospel.  The  one  was  exter- 
nal, the  other  spiritual ;  the  one  was  an  outward  precept,  the 
other  an  inward  power.  In  the  one  case  the  law  was  written 
on  stone,  in  the  other  on  the  heart.  The  one  therefore  was 
letter^  the  other  sjnrit. 

For  the  letter  (i.  e.  the  law)  Jcilleth^  but  the  spirit  (i.  e.  the 
gospel)  giveth  life.  This  is  the  reason  why  God  hath  made 
Paul  the  minister  of  the  spirit.  '  God  had  made  us  able  min- 
isters not  of  the  law  but  of  the  gospel,  for  the  law  kills,  but 
the  gospel  gives  life.'  This  passage  and  the  following  context 
present  two  important  questions.  First,  in  what  sense  does 
the  law  kill  ?  And  second,  How  is  it  that  the  apostle  attrib- 
utes to  the  Mosaic  system  this  purely  legal  character,  when 
he  elsewhere  so  plainly  teaches  that  the  gospel  was  witnessed 
or  taught  both  in  the  law  and  the  proj^hets  ?  As  to  the  for- 
mer of  these  questions,  the  answer  furnished  by  the  Scriptures 
is  plain.  The  law  demands  perfect  obedience.  It  says,  "  Do 
this  and  live,"  Rom.  10,  5.  Gal.  3,  12,  and  "Cursed  is  every 
one  who  continueth  not  in  all  things  written  in  the  book  of 
the  law  to  do  them,"  Gal.  3,  10.  As  no  man  renders  this 
perfect  obedience,  the  law  condemns  him.  It  pronounces  on 
him  the  sentence  of  death.  This  is  one  way  in  which  it  kills. 
In  the  second  place,  it  produces  the  knowledge  or  conscious- 
ness of  sin,  and  of  course  of  guilt,  that  is,  of  just  exposure  to 
the  wrath  of  God.  Thus  again  it  slays.  And  thirdly,  by  pre- 
senting the  perfect  standard  of  duty,  which  cannot  be  seen 
without  awakening  the  sense  of  obligation  to  be  conformed  to 
it,  while  it  imj^arts  no  disposition  or  power  to  obey,  it  exasper- 
ates the  soul  and  thus  again  it  bi'ings  forth  fruit  unto  death. 
All  these  elFects  of  the  law  are  systematically  presented  by 
the  apostle  in  the  Gth  and  Yth  chapters  of  his  epistle  to  the 
Romans,  and  in  the  3d  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians, 

Tiie  second  qiuestion  is  more  difficult.  Every  reader  of 
the  New  Testament  must  be  struck  with  the  fact  that  the 
apostle  often  speaks  of  the  Mosaic  law  as  he  does  of  the  moral 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  6. 


07 


law  considered  as  a  covenant  of  works ;  that  is,  presenting  the 
promise  of  life  on  the  condition  of  perfect  obedience.  He 
represents  it  as  saying,  Do  this  and  live ;  as  requiring  works, 
and  not  laith,  as  the  condition  of  acceptance.  Rom.  10,  5-10. 
Gal.  3,  10-12.  He  calls  it  a  ministration  of  death  and  con- 
demnation. He  denies  that  it  can  give  life.  Gal.  3,  21.  He 
tells  those  who  are  of  the  law  (that  is,  Judaizers)  that  they 
had  fallen  from  grace ;  that  is,  had  renounced  the  gratuitous 
method  of  salvation,  and  that  Christ  should  profit  them  noth- 
ing. Gal.  5,  2.  4.  In  short,  when  he  uses  the  word  law,  and 
says  that  by  the  law  is  the  knowledge  of  sin,  that  it  can  only 
condemn,  that  by  its  works  no  flesh  can  be  justified,  he  in- 
cludes the  Mosaic  law  ;  and  in  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians  all 
these  things  are  said  with  special  reference  to  the  law  of  Mo- 
ses. On  the  other  hand,  however,  he  teaches  that  the  plan 
of  salvation  has  been  the  same  from  the  beginning;  that 
Christ  was  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  committed  under  the 
old  covenant ;  that  men  were  saved  then  as  now  by  faith  in 
Christ ;  that  this  mode  of  salvation  was  revealed  to  Abraham 
and  understood  by  him,  and  taught  by  Moses  and  the  prophets. 
This  view  is  presented  rejDeatedly  in  Paul's  epistles,  and  is  ar- 
gued out  in  due  form  in  Rom.  3,  21-31.  Rom.  4,  and  Gal.  3. 
To  reconcile  these  apparently  conflicting  representations  it 
must  be  remembered  that  the  Mosaic  economy  was  designed 
to  accom2)lish  difierent  objects,  and  is  therefore  presented  in 
Scripture  under  difierent  aspects.  What,  therefore,  is  true  of 
it  under  one  aspect,  is  not  true  under  another.  1.  The  law 
of  Moses  was,  in  the  first  place,  a  re-enactment  of  the  covenant 
of  works.  A  covenant  is  simply  a  promise  suspended  upon  a 
condition.  The  covenant  of  works,  therefore,  is  nothing  more 
tlian  the  promise  of  life  suspended  on  the  condition  of  perfect 
obedience.  The  phrase  is  used  as  a  concise  and  convenient 
expression  of  the  eternal  principles  of  justice  on  which  God 
deals  with  rational  creatures,  and  which  underlie  all  dispensa- 
tions, the  Adamic,  Abrahamic,  Mosaic  and  Christian.  Our 
Lord  said  to  the  lawyer  who  asked  what  he  should  do  to  in- 
liei'it  eternal  life,  "  What  is  written  in  the  law  ?  How  readest 
thou  ?  And  he  answering  said,  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  v.ith  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
tt length,  and  with  all  thy  mind  ;  and  thy  neighbour  as  thy- 
»v;!!r".  And  he  said  unto  him,  Thou  hast  answered  right,  this 
do  and  thou  shalt  live,"  Luke  10,  26-28.  This  is  the  covenant 
of  works.     It  is  an  immutable  principle  that  where  there  is  no 


58  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  6. 

sin  there  is  no  condemnation,  and  where  t?iere  is  sin  there  is 
death.  This  is  all  that  those  who  reject  the  gospel  have  to 
fall  back  upon.  It  is  this  principle  which  is  rendered  so 
prominent  in  the  Mosaic  economy  as  to  give  it  its  character 
of  law.  Viewed  under  this  aspect  it  is  the  ministration  of 
condemnation  and  death.  2.  The  Mosaic  economy  was  also  a 
national  covenant ;  that  is,  it  presented  national  promises  on 
the  condition  of  national  obedience.  Under  this  aspect  also  it 
was  purely  legal.  But  3,  as  the  gospel  contains  a  renewed 
revelation  of  the  law,  so  the  law  of  Moses  contained  a  revela- 
tion of  the  gospel.  It  presented  in  its  priesthood  and  sacri- 
fices, as  types  of  the  ofiice  and  work  of  Christ,  the  gratuitous 
method  of  salvation  through  a  Redeemer.  This  necessarily 
supposes  that  faith  and  not  works  was  the  condition  of  salva- 
tion. It  was  those  who  trusted,  not  those  free  from  sin,  who 
were  saved.  Thus  Moses  wrote  of  Christ,  John  5,  46 ;  and 
thus  the  law  and  the  prophets  witnessed  of  a  righteousness  of 
faith,  Rom.  3,  21.  When  therefore  the  apostle  spoke  of  the 
old  covenant  under  its  legal  aspect,  and  especially  when  speak- 
ing to  those  who  rejected  the  gospel  and  clung  to  the  law  of 
Moses  as  law,  then  he  says,  it  kills,  or  is  the  ministration  of 
condemnation.  But  when  viewing  it,  and  especially  when 
speaking  of  those  who  viewed  it  as  setting  forth  the  great 
doctrine  of  redemption  through  the  blood  of  Christ,  he  repre- 
sented it  as  teaching  his  own  doctrine.  The  law,  in  every 
form,  moral  or  Mosaic,  natural  or  revealed,  kills.  In  demand- 
ing works  as  the  condition  of  salvation,  it  must  condemn  all 
sinners.  But  the  gospel,  whether  as  revealed  in  the  promise 
to  Adam  after  his  fall,  or  in  the  promise  to  Abraham,  or  in 
the  writmgs  of  Moses,  or  in  its  full  clearness  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, gives  life.  As  the  old  covenant  revealed  both  the  law' 
and  the  gospel,  it  either  killed  or  gave  Ufe,  according  to  the 
light  in  which  it  was  viewed.  And  therefore  Paul  sometimes 
says  it  does  the  one,  and  sometimes  the  other.  £ut  the  spirit 
giveth  life.  The  spirit,  or  the  gospel,  gives  life  in  a  sense  cor- 
relative to  that  in  which  tJte  letter  (i.  e.  the  law)  kills.  1.  By 
revealing  a  righteousness  adequate  to  our  justification,  and 
thus  delivering  us  from  the  sentence  of  death.  2.  By  pro- 
ducing the  assurance  of  God's  love  and  the  hope  of  his  glory 
in  the  place  of  a  dread  of  his  wrath.  3.  By  becoming,  through 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  an  inward  principle  or  power 
transforming  us  into  the  image  of  God ;  instead  of  a  mere  out- 
ward command. 


II.    CORINTHIANS   3,  7.8.  59 

7.  8.  But  if  the  ministration  of  deatl],  Avritto.n  (and) 
engraven  in  stones,  was  glorious,  so  that  the  children 
of  Israel  could  not  steadfastly  behold  the  face  of  Moses 
for  the  glory  of  his  countenance  ;  which  (glory)  was  to 
1)6  done  away :  how  shall  not  the  ministration  of  the 
Spirit  be  rather  glorious  ? 

It  was  the  design  and  eiFect  of  the  law  to  kill.  This  is 
true,  so  far  as  the  work  of  salvation  is  concerned,  of  the  law 
in  all  its  forms,  whether  the  moral  law  as  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures,  or  as  written  in  the  heart,  or  as  the  Mosaic  law. 
In  all  these  forms  it  was  designed  to  bring  men  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  sin  and  helplessness ;  to  produce  a  sense  of  guilt  and 
misery,  and  a  longing  for  redemption,  and  thus  be  a  school- 
master to  bring  men  to  Christ.  Gal.  3,  24.  This  was  a  neces- 
sary office,  and  therefore  glorious.  But  how  can  it  compare 
with  the  gospel  ?  How  can  that  which  only  makes  us  know 
that  we  are  sinful  and  condemned,  be  compared  with  that 
which  delivers  us  from  sin  and  condemnation  ?  This  is  the 
idea  which  the  apostle  expands,  and,  as  it  were  with  exulta- 
tion, turns  over  as  though  he  could  not  let  it  go,  in  vs.  7—11. 
But  if  the  ministration  of  death.,  written  (and)  graven  in 
stones.  The  Greek  is,  h  Se  r)  8ta<oi'ta  tov  ^avarov  €1/  ypa/A/xacriv 
€VT€TV7rojixevr]  iv  A.t^ots,  but  if  the  mijiistration  of  death  in  letters 
engraven  in  stones.  The  simplest  interpretation  of  these 
words  is  that  the  ministration  of  death  was  in  letters,  i.  e.  by 
means  of  letters,  engraven  on  stone ;  Avhich  is  the  sense  ex- 
pressed by  the  free  translation  given  in  our  common  version. 
According  to  this  view  kv  ypa/x/xacrti/  are  connected  with  what 
follows.  But  more  commonly  they  are  connected  with  what 
precedes ;  the  ministration  of  death  in  letters^  which  Luther 
makes  to  mean,  "  the  ministration  which  by  means  of  letters 
(i.  e.  the  written  law)  produces  death."  This  certainly  gives 
a  good  sense  and  consistent  with  the  context ;  but  it  is  not  so 
simple  or  natural  as  the  one  first  mentioned.  It  will  be  ob- 
served that  Paul  says  that  the  ministration  was  engraven  on 
stone.  It  was,  however,  of  course  not  the  ministration  (the 
office  of  a  minister)  but  the  law  itself  that  was  thus  engraven. 
There  are  two* things  here. stated.  First,  that  Moses  was  tho 
minister  of  a  covenant  that  produced  death ;  and  secondly, 
that  that  covenant  was  an  external  economy  or  system. 
These  two  ideas  are  combined  at  the  expense  of  mere  verbal 


CO  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  7.8. 

accuracy  in  a  single  clause.  The  word  StaKovta,  ministration^ 
means  either  the  service^  i.  e.  the  act  of  ministering,  or  the 
office  of  a  8taKoi/os  or  minister.  Commonly  the  former.  In 
what  sense  the  ministr_y  of  the  law  was  a  ministry  of  death, 
and  the  reason  why  the  law  is  described  as  engraven  on  stone, 
have  ah-eadybeen  stated.  The  law  is  thus  exhibited  as  exter- 
nal,  as  opposed  to  what  is  spiritual. 

Was  glorious^  iyev-q^rj  iv  Bo^a,  existed  in  glory ;  was  sur- 
rounded, as  it  we)-e,  by  a  halo.  The  reference  here  is  only 
indirectly  to  the  brightness  of  Moses's  face,  which  was  but  a 
symbol  of  the  glory  of  his  ministration.  The  glory  which  per- 
tained to  the  old  dispensation  was  not  the  illumination  of  the 
countenance  of  Moses,  which  was  merely  an  incident.  It  was 
cf  the  same  kind,  though  less  in  degree,  as.  the  glory  of  the 
gospel.  The  one  dispensation  was  indeed  glorious,  but  the 
other  was  more  so.  So  that  the  children  of  Israel  could  not 
steadfastly  behold  the  face  of  3foses.  The  whole  service  was 
so  glorious  that  even  the  face  of  Moses  was  so  bright  that  the 
people  could  not  look  upon  it.  This  brightness  of  the  face  of 
Moses  was  in  two  respects  a  symbol  of  the  glory  of  the  old 
dispensation.  In  the  first  place,  it  was  an  outward  brightness. 
So  too  the  glory  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  was  derived  in 
large  measure  from  its  pompous  ritual,  its  temple,  its  priest- 
hood, its  sacrifice,  and,  above  all,  its  Shekinah,  or  visible  sym- 
bol of  the  divine  presence.  But  what  was  all  this  to  the  glory 
of  the  gospel?  What  was  a  bright  cloud  overhanging  the 
cherubim,  to  the  light  of  God's  presence  filling  the  soul? 
And  secondly,  the  brightness  of  the  face  of  Moses  was  tran- 
sient. The  participle  Karapyovixiv-qv  may  be  taken  as  imperfect 
— They  could  not  behold  it  as  it  was  vanishing  away  ;  or  as 
present,  which  is  evanescent^  ox  perishahle.  It  was  in  its  own 
nature  a  mere  transient  brightness,  analogous  to  the  tempora- 
ry splendour  of  the  service  committed  to  him.  How  shall  not 
the  ministration  of  the  Spirit  he  rather  glorious  f  If  the  one 
was  glorious,  how  much  more  the  other !  The  future  shall  is 
not  to  be  understood  in  reference  to  the  future  world.  The 
idea  is  not  that  hereafter,  when  Christ's  kingdom  is  consum- 
mated, the  ministration  of  the  gospel  shall  be  found  more  glo- 
rious than  that  of  the  law.  The  future  expresses  the  certain 
sequence.  If  the  ministration  of  death  was  glorious,  the  min- 
istration of  the  Spirit  shall  assuredly,  if  rightly  considered,  be 
regarded  as  glorious.  This  is  plain  from  the  fact  that  the 
things  compared  are  the  ministration  committed  to  Moses  and 


I 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  9.  61 


the  ministration  committed  to  Paul ;  and  also  from  the  reason 
assigned  for  the  superiority  of  the  latter,  which  is  not  what  is 
to  be  realized  in  the  future,  bat  what  is  experienced  in  the 
present.  It  was  because  it  is  the  ministration  of  the  spirit 
that  it  is  more  glorious  than  the  ministration  of  death.  The 
ideas  of  life  a^.ct  life-giving  are  inseparable  from  that  of  spirit. 
Hence  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  ancient  creeds  of  the  church  is 
designated  as  ro  Trveu/xa  to  aytov,  TO  Kvpiov,  to  ^tooTTOtoi/.  And 
hence  the  gospel  as  the  source  of  life  is  called  spirit.  It  is 
doubtful,  however,  whether  the  word  sjnrit  here  refers  to  the 
Holy  Spirit,  or  to  the  gospel.  Luther  renders  the  phrase  y 
hiaKovia  tov  Trveu/z-aros,  clcis  Amt,  clas  den  Gelst  giebt^  i.  e.  the  of- 
fice which  gives  the  Spirit ;  because  it  is  by  the  ministration 
of  the  gospel  the  Holy  Spirit  is  imparted  to  men.  This  view 
is  perhaps  commonly  adopted.  Bat  as  in  v.  6,  spirit^  as  op- 
posed to  letter^  evidently  means  the  gospel  as  op2:)Osed  to  the 
law,  and  as  the  things  compared  are  the  law  and  gospel,  or 
the  ministry  of  the  one  and  the  ministry  of  the  other,  the  prob- 
ability is  that  Paul  intended  the  word  to  be  so  understood 
here.  The  gospel  is  spirit  because  it  is  the  source  of  life. 
Instead  of  being  something  external  and  powerless,  it  is  in- 
ward and  saving ;  and  this  is  the  ground  of  its  superiority  to 
the  law. 


9.  For  if  the  ministration  of  condemnation  (be) 
glory,  much  more  doth  the  ministration  of  righteous- 
ness exceed  in  glory. 

This  verse  is  a  confirmation  of  the  preceding.  The  gospel 
is  more  glorious  than  the  law,  for  the  ministration  of  righteous- 
ness is  more  glorious  than  the  ministration  of  condemnation. 
The  ministration  of  condemnation  is  that  ministration  which 
brings  men  into  a  state  of  conscious  condemnation ;  that  is, 
which  makes  them  know  and  feel  that  they  are  condemned. 
The  mhiistration  of  righteousness  is  that  ministration  which 
reveals  a  righteousness  by  which  men  are  justified,  and  thus 
freed  from  the  condemnation  pronounced  upon  them  by  the 
law.  As  much  better  therefore  as  justification  is  than  con- 
demnation to  eternal  death,  so  much  better  is  the  gospel  than 
the  law.  Although  the  words  KarccKpto-ts,  condemnation^  and 
StKaiocrtV/?,  righteousness^  are  here  in  antithesis,  it  does  not  fol- 
low that  the  latter  means  justification^  which  is  a  sense  it 


62  n.   CORINTIlIAi^S   8,  10 


never  has  in  the  Xew  Testament.  It  retains  its  proper  mean* 
ing,  righteousness,  i.  e.  that  which  the  law  demands.  It  is 
not  justification,  but  the  ground  of  it;  that  on  account  of 
which  a  man  is  justified  or  pronounced  righteous.  The  gos- 
pel, being  the  ministration  of  the  spirit,  is  the  ministration  of 
lighleousness,  because  as  what  is  spirit  is  life-giving,  the  gos- 
pel must  reveal  a  righteousness  which  satisfies  the  demands 
of  the  law,  and  thus  free  us  from  judicial  death,  or  it  could 
not  be  the  source  of  life.  It  is  true  that  the  life  of  which  the 
gospel  is  the  source  is  more  than  mere  justification ;  but  as 
justification  is  the  necessary  condition  of  spiritual  life,  Paul 
here  exalts  the  gospel  by  making  it  the  means  of  securing 
that  righteousness  which  is  necessary  to  sanctitication  and  in- 
separable from  it.  The  use  of  the  present  tense,  Treptoro-euet, 
doth  abound,  in  this  verse,  serves  to  confirm  the  explanation 
given  of  v.  8.  Paul  in  both  instances  is  speaking  of  the  glory 
which  now  belongs  to  the  ministry  of  the  gospel,  not  of  what 
is  to  be  hereafter. 


10.  For  even  that  which  was  made  glorious  hath 
no  glory  in  this  respect,  by  reason  of  the  glory  that 
excelleth. 

For  even,  koI  ydp,  for  moreover.  Too  little  was  said  in 
simply  asserting  that  the  gospel  excelled  the  law.  The  law, 
though  glorious  in  itself,  ceased  to  be  glorious  in  the  presence 
of  the  gospel,  as  the  moon  loses  its  brightness  in  the  presence 
of  the  sun.  That  which  teas  made  glorious,  t6  ^eSo^aaixevuv, 
that  which  was  and  is  glorious,  viz.  the  ministry  of  Moses,  and, 
by  implication,  the  law  or  dispensation  of  which  he  was  the 
minister.  Hath  no  glory,  ov  SeSo^ttorat,  is  not  glorious,  iv 
rovTio  Tc5  fxep€L,  in  this  jyarticular.  This  is  explained  by  what 
follows,  jjecause  of  the  glory  that  excelleth.  Tiie  ministry 
of  the  gospel  so  much  excels  the  ministry  of  the  law,  that  the 
latter  ceases  in  the  comparison  to  be  glorious  at  all.  This  is 
the  common  and  natural  interpretation  of  the  text.  Two  other 
explanations  have  been  proposed.  First,  the  w^ords  Iv  tovtw 
TO)  /xcptt  aJ*e  connected  with  SeSo^acr/xeVov,  that  ichich  teas  glori' 
ous  (viz.  the  ministry  of  Moses),  in  this  particular,  viz.  that  the 
face  of  Moses  was  rendered  luminous.  This  gives  a  very  in- 
significant  sense.  The  shining  of  the  face  of  Moses  was  not 
the  glory  of  his  ministry  or  of  the  old  economy.     It  was  but 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  11.  63 

a  syrabol  of  it.  Second,  Meyer  and  others,  retaining  the  ordi- 
nary construction  of  the  passage,  make  the  apostle  sdy,  that 
the  general  truth  that  the  lesser  glory  is  eclipsed  by  the 
greater,  was  illustrated  in  this  case,  i.  e.  in  the  case  of  Moses 
and  his  ministry.  This  brings  out  the  same  sense  as  that 
given  by  the  ordinary  interpretation,  but  in  a  less  natural 
way.  27iat  lohieh  icas  made  glorious,  to  SeSolacr/xeVov,  natu- 
rally refers  to  the  definite  subject  of  which  the  context  treats, 
which  is  the  ministry  of  Moses. 

11.  For  if  that  whicli  was  done  away  (was)  glorious, 
much  more  that  which  remaineth  (is)  glorious. 

A  new  ground  of  superiority.  The  old  dispensation  and 
its  ministry  were  temporary,  the  new  is  permanent.  There  ia 
nothing  to  intervene,  no  new  revelation,  no  new  economy,  be- 
tween the  gospel  and  its  ministry,  and  the  final  consummation. 
Whoever  are  to  be  converted,  whatever  nations  are  to  be 
brought  in,  it  must  be  by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  ichich 
remaineth,  or  is  to  continue,  according  to  Christ's  promise, 
until  the  end  of  the  world.  In  the  former  clause  the  apostle 
says  the  law  was  Sta  80^175,  icith  glory,  in  the  latter,  that  the 
gospel  was  Iv  ^o^y,  in  glory.  This  is  a  mere  variation  of  ex- 
pression without  any  difference  of  meaning.  Comp.  Rom.  3, 
30.  5,  10.  That  the  binding  authority  of  the  law  ceased  on 
the  introduction  of  the  gospel,  is  a  doctrine  which  the  apostle 
had  to  sustain  against  the  Judaizing  tendency  of  the  early 
Christians,  on  many  occasions.  To  this  point  the  epistles  to 
the  Galatians  and  to  the  Hebrews  are  principally  directed. 
As  Paul's  opponents  in  Corinth  were  of  this  class,  there  is 
little  doubt  that  what  he  here  says  of  the  inferiority  and  tem- 
porary character  of  the  old  economy  had  a  special  reference 
to  them ;  while  his  strong  assertion  of  his  divine  mission,  of 
the  dignity  and  superiority  of  the  ministry  which  he  had  re- 
ceived, was  intended  to  counteract  the  influence  of  their  in- 
vidious attacks  upon  his  authority.  No  less  clear  is  the  incul- 
cation of  the  other  great  truth  here  presented.  The  gospel 
did  away  thedaw,  but  is  itself  never  to  be  superseded.  These 
are  "  the  last  times,"  the  last  dispensation,  which  is  to  con- 
tinuc  until  the  consummation  of  all  things. 


o4  il.   CORINTHIANS   3,  12. 

The  clearness  qnd  freedom  of  the  Gospel  as  contrasted  loith 
the  obscurity  of  the  Law.     Vs.  12-18. 

The  apostle  having  referred  to  the  transient  brightness  of 
Moses's  face,  as  a  symbol  of  the  passing  glory  of  his  ministry, 
here  employs  the  fact  that  Moses  veiled  his  face  as  a  twofold 
illustration.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  symbolical  of  the  obscuri- 
ty of  the  revelation  made  under  the  old  dispensation.  As  the 
brightness  of  Moses's  face  was  covered,  so  spiritual  or  evan- 
gelical  truth  was  of  old  covered  under  the  types  and  shadows 
of  the  Mosaic  economy.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  symbolical 
of  the  blindness  which  rested  on  the  minds  of  the  Jews,  which 
prevented  their  seeing  the  true  import  of  their  own  institu- 
tions, vs.  12-15.  Nevertheless,  as  Moses  removed  the  veil 
from  his  face  when  he  turned  to  the  Lord,  so  both  the  ob- 
scurity which  rests  on  the  laiv,  and  the  blindness  which  rests 
iil^on  the  mind  of  the  Je\v^,  are  dispelled  when  he  turns 
towards  Christ.  The  vision  of  his  glory  transforms  the  soul 
into  his  likeness,  vs.  16-18. 

12.  Seeing  then  that  we  have  such  hope,  we  use 
great  plainness  of  speech. 

Seeing  then  that  we  have  such  hope^  literally.  Having  then 
such  hope^  T.  e.  because  we  have  it.  The  hope  to  which  he  refers 
must  be  that  mentioned  in  the  context,  v.  14,  that  the  gospel 
and  its  ministry  were,  and  Avould  prove  themselves  to  be,  far 
superior  to  the  law  and  to  the  ministry  of  Moses.  What  in 
V.  4  he  calls  TreTrot^i^ort?,  confidence^  he  here  calls  cXTrt?,  Jiope., 
because  the  confidence  which  he  felt  had  reference  not  only  to 
the  present,  but  also  to  the  future.  TFe  tise  great  plainness 
of  speech^  i.  e.  irapp-qa-ia^  outspokenness.  This  stands  ojDposed 
to  all  concealment,  whether  from  timidity  or  from  a  desire  to 
deceive ;  and  also  to  all  fear  of  consequences.  It  is  a  frank, 
open,  courageous  manner  of  speech.  Paul  therefore  says  that 
in  his  case  it  "s\as  the  result  of  his  firm  conviction  of  his  divine 
mission  and  of  the  truth  and  glory  of  the  gospel  which  ho 
preached,  that  he  proclaimed  it  fully,  intelligibly,  and  with- 
out regard  to  consequences.  Its  being  to  the  Greeks  foolish- 
ness, and  to  the  Jews  a  stuniblingblock,  did  not  prevent  his 
declaring  the  whole  counsel  of  God.  The  same  cause  will 
ever  produce  the  same  effect.  If  Paul's  experience  of  the 
truth  and  excellence  of  the  gospel  led  him  to  declare  it  with- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  13.  05 

out  reserve;,  a  similar  experience  will  produce  a  similar  open- 
ness and  boldness  in  other  ministers  of  the  gospel.  This  in- 
deed is  one  of  the  glories  of  Christianity.  It  is  characteristic 
of  error  to  practise  reserve  and  to  seek  concealment.  In  all 
the  religions  of  antiquity  there  was  an  esoteric  and  exoteric 
doctrine ;  one  for  the  people  and  the  other  of  the  initiated. 
They  all  had  mysteries  carefully  concealed  from  the  public 
eye.  So  in  the  Romish  church,  just  in  proportion  as  it  is  in- 
fected with  the  spirit  of  heathenism  the  doctrine  of  reserve  is 
avowed  and  practised.  The  gospel  is  not  preached  with 
openness,  so  that  all  may  understand  it.  The  people  are  kept 
in  ignorance.  They  are  told  they  need  not  know  ;  that  faith 
without  knowledge,  a  blind  confidence  in  rites  which  they  do 
not  understand,  is  all-sufficient.  But  if  a  man  in  a  church  has 
the  conviction  that  the  gospel  is  of  God,  that  it  is  unspeakably 
glorious,  adajjted  to  all  and  needed  by  all  in  order  to  salva- 
tion, then  the  word  will  be  preached  openly  and  without 
reserve. 


13.  And  not  as  Moses,  (wliicli)  put  a  veil  over  his 
face,  that  the  children  of  Israel  could  not  steadfastly 
look  to  the  end  of  that  which  is  abolished. 

And  not  as  Jfoses^  that  is,  we  do  not  do  what  Moses  did. 
Paul  had  just  said  that  he  used  great  plainness  of  speech,  that 
he  practised  no  concealment  or  reserve.  Of  course  he  means 
that  Moses  did  the  reverse.  He  did  use  concealment  and 
practise  reserve.  This  is  no  impeachment  of  the  character 
of  Moses.  Paul  is  not  speaking  of  his  personal  character,  but 
of  the  nature  of  his  office.  The  truth  concerning  man's  re- 
demption was  not  "  in  other  ages  made  known  unto  the  sons 
of  men  as  it  is  now  revealed  unto  the  holy  apostles  and 
prophets  by  the  Spirit,"  Eph.  3,  5.  It  was  not  consistent 
with  the  nature  of  the  ministry  of  Moses  to  use  the  Trapprja-ia^ 
the  openness,  in  communicating  the  doctrines  of  redemption, 
which  it  is  the  glory  of  the  Christian  ministry  to  be  permitted 
to  employ.  He  was  sent  to  speak  in  parables  and  in  types,  to 
set  forth  truth  in  the  form  of  significant  rites  and  ceremonies. 
He  put  a  veil  over  the  glory,  not  to  hide  it  entirely  from 
view,  but  to  obscure  its  brightness.  The  people  saw  the 
light,  but  only  occasionally  and  imperfectly.  Paul  had  alrea- 
dy spoken  of  the  brightness  of  Moses's  face  as  a  symbol  of  his 


60  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  13. 

ministry,  and  therefore  he  represents  him  as  veiling  himself 
to  express  the  idea  that  he  communicated  the  truth  obscurely. 
Paul  was  sent  to  let  the  truth  shine  forth  clearly ;  he  did  not 
put  a  veil  over  it  as  Moses  did,  and  was  commanded  to  do. 
That  the  children  of  Israel  coul'd  not  steadfastly  look  to  the  end 
of  that  ichich  is  abolished.  That  is,  to  prevent  their  seeing  the 
end  or  fiding  away  of  the  brightness  of  his  face.  The  word 
Karapyovfxcvos  {that  lohich  is  abolished)  is  used,  v.  7,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  glory  of  the  face  of  Moses,  and  v.  11  in  reference 
to  his  ministry  and  the  dispensation  to  which  it  belonged. 
Here  the  reference  is  to  the  former,  because  his  face  is  spoken 
of,  and  its  brightness  was  veiled,  and  therefore,  it  was  the 
brightness  the  end  of  which  the  Israelites  were  prevented 
from  seeing.  If  this  be  so,  then  reA-os,  the  end^  must  mean  the 
termination,  and  not  the  design  or  scope.  In  Rom.  10,  4, 
Christ  is  said  to  be  the  end  of  the  law,  not  only  as  abrogating 
it,  but  as  being  the  object  towards  which  it  tended.  He  was 
that  which  it  was  intended  to  reveal.  Those  commentators 
who  make  KaTapyov[xevov  {that  ichich  is  abolished)  refer  to  the 
old  law  and  its  ministry,  give  reAos  the  sense  of  end  or  object. 
They  understand  the  apostle  to  say  that  Moses  put  a  veil  over 
his  liice  to  prevent  the  children  of  Israel  seeing  Christ,  who  was 
the  end  of  the  law.  But  this  gives  a  most  incongruous  mean- 
ing. How  could  Moses's  veiling  his  face  prevent  the  Israel- 
ites seeing  Christ?  The  first  part  of  the  verse  cannot  be 
taken  literally,  and  the  latter  part  figuratively.  If  the  veiling 
was  a  literal  covering  of  the  face,  that  which  the  veil  hid  must 
be  something  which  a  literal  veil  could  cover.  The  majority 
t)f  commentators,  theref^jre,  understand  the  words,  that  lohich 
is  abolished^  to  refer  to  the  visible  brightness  of  the  face  of 
Moses,  and  the  end  to  mean  the  termination  of  that  brightness. 
The  whole  clause  therefore  means  that  Moses  veiled  his  face 
in  order  to  prevent  the  Israelites  seeing  how  soon  its  bright- 
ness faded.  But  what  has  this  to  do  with  the  point  in  hand  ? 
In  answering  this  question  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
apostle  had  referred  to  the  brightness  of  the  face  of  Moses  as 
a  fit  symbol  of  his  ministry,  inasmuch  as  it  was  extei'nal  and 
transient.  To  say,  therefore,  that  Moses  veiled  his  face  that 
the  people  miglit  not  see  the  end  of  its  brightness,  is  a  figura- 
tive way  of  saying  that  Moses  hid  the  light,  or  taught  ob- 
scurely, that  the  people  might  not  miderstand  the  true  nature 
and  intent  of  his  ministry.  But  how  is  it  consistent  with  the 
character  of  God  that  he  should  commission  Moses  to  teach 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  13.  C7 

obscurely  in  order  that  he  might  not  be  understood  ?  Some 
endeavour  to  obviate  this  diflSculty  by  saying  that  Trpo^  to  fxr} 
artiiarai  expresses  the  result  and  not  the  design.  'He  put  a 
veil  over  his  face,  so  that  (not,  m  order  that)  the  children  of 
Israel  did  not  see  the  end  of  that  which  is  abolished.'  Or,  to 
drop  the  iigure,  '  He  taught  obscurely,  so  that  the  people  did 
not  understand  him.'  This  explanation,  however,  is  forbidden 
by  the  force  of  the  preposition  Trpds,  which  in  such  connections 
properly  expresses  the  design  or  intention.  There  is  no  spe- 
cial difficulty  in  the  matter.  Whatever  is,  God  intended 
should  be.  If  Moses  taught  obscurely  or  in  types,  God  in- 
tended that  he  should  do  so.  If,  in  point  of  fact,  the  Jews 
misunderstood  the  nature  of  their  own  economy,  regarding  as 
ultimate  and  permanent  what  was  in  fact  preparatory  and 
temporary,  this  was  included  in  the  divine  purpose.  It  was 
evidently  the  plan  of  God  to  make  the  revelation  of  the 
scheme  of  redemption  gradually.  The  whole  was  by  slow 
degrees  evolved  Irom  the  original  promise  made  to  our  first 
parents.  Perhaps  the  object  of  their  flxith  was  the  simple 
promise  of  redemption.  To  Abraham  it  was  revealed  that 
the  Redeemer  was  to  be  one  of  his  descendants.  To  Moses  it 
was  made  known  that  he  was  to  be  a  prophet  like  himself,  and 
the  nature  of  his  work  was  obscurely  set  forth  in  the  priest- 
hood and  sacrifices  which  he  ordained.  This  was  enough  for 
salvation,  so  long  as  nothing  more  had  been  revealed.  It  was 
in  accordance  with  this  plan  that  Moses  spoke  in  such  a  way 
that  the  people  did  not  understand  the  full  import  of  his 
leaching,  God  having  purposed  "  that  they  without  us  should 
not  be  made  perfect,"  Heb.  11,  40.  The  passage  before  us  is 
parallel,  in  a  measure,  to  Mark  4,  11,  where  our  Lord  says, 
"  Unto  you  it  is  given  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom 
of  God ;  but  unto  them  that  are  without  all  these  things  are 
done  in  parables ;  that  seeing  they  may  see,  and  not  per- 
ceive." There  is,  therefore,  as  just  remarked,  no  special  diffi- 
culty in  this  passage,  even  if  it  is  understood  to  teach  that 
Moses  was  commissioned  so  to  veil  his  teachings  that  they 
should  not  be  clearly  understood.  There  is  another  difficulty 
connected  v*ith  this  verse.  It  does  not  seem  to  agree  with 
Exodus  34,  30.  There  it  is  said  that  the  people  were  afraid 
to  approach  Moses  on  account  of  the  brightness  of  his  face, 
and  the  implication  (according  to  the  English  version,  at  least) 
is,  that  it  was  to  calm  their  fears  he  put  on  a  veil.  Whereaa 
here  it  is  said  that  he  put  a  veil  over  his  face  that  the  people 


68  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  14. 

might  not  see  the  transient  nature  of  that  brightness.  There 
is  no  inconsistency  between  the  two  accounts.  The  veiUng 
had  both  effects ;  it  cahned  tlie  fears  of  the  people,  and  it  pre- 
vented their  seeing  how  fleeting  the  brightness  was.  As  both 
effects  followed,  both  were  intended.  Paul  in  this  epistle  as- 
signs in  different  places  three  or  four  reasons  why  he  com- 
manded the  Corinthians  to  excommunicate  the  incestuous 
member  of  their  church.  That  it  was  meant  as  a  test  of  their 
obedience,  2,  9,  is  not  incompatible  with  its  being  a  proof  of 
his  care  for  them,  7,  12.  There  is,  however,  not  even  the  ap- 
pearance of  discrepancy  between  what  the  apostle  here  says 
and  Exodus  34,  30-33,  as  it  is  rendered  both  in  the  Septuagint 
and  Vulgate.  The  English  version  of  that  passage  is,  "  And 
when  Aaron  and  all  the  children  of  Israel  saw  Moses,  behold, 
the  skin  of  his  face  shone ;  and  they  were  afraid  to  come  nigh 
him.  And  Moses  called  unto  them ;  and  Aaron  and  all  the 
rulers  of  the  congregation  returned  unto  him :  and  Moses 
talked  with  them.  .  .  .  And  till  Moses  had  done  speaking 
with  them,  he  put  a  veil  on  his  face."  According  to  this 
Moses  put  a  veil  over  his  face  when  he  s|X)ke  to  the  people, 
and  the  implication  is  that  he  did  it  because  they  were  afraid 
on  account  of  the  brightness  of  his  countenance.  But  the 
Hebrew,  in  v.  33,  is  simply,  "Moses  ceased  to  speak  with 
them,  and  put  a  veil  over  his  face."  The  natural  meaning  of 
which  is  that  he  did  not  veil  his  face  until  he  had  ceased 
speaking.  The  Septuagint  therefore  renders  the  passage, 
"And  when  he  ceased  speaking  with  them,  he  put  a  veil  over 
his  face."  And  the  Vulgate,  impletisque  sermonibus^  ^:)05ia'i 
velamen  super  fctciem  suam.  It  appears  from  the  following 
verses  that  when  Moses  went  in  before  the  Lord,  he  removed 
the  veil ;  and  when  he  came  out  his  face  shone,  and  he  spake 
to  the  people,  and  again  resumed  the  veil.  According  to  this 
interpretation  of  the  original,  the  object  of  putting  on  the  veil 
was  not  to  calm  the  fear  of  the  people,  but,  as  Paul  says,  to 
prevent  their  seeing  how  tho  brightness  of  his  face  vanished. 

14.  But  their  minds  were  blinded ;  for  until  this 
day  reinaineth  the  same  veil  untaken  away  in  the  read- 
ing of  the  Old  Testament ;  which  (veil)  is  done  away 
in  Christ. 

In  the  preceding  verse  Paul  was  speaking  of  his  ministry ; 


i 


II.  COKIXTHIAXS   3,  U.  6f) 


the  Slime  subject  is  resumed  in  the  folloT^■ing  chapter.  Verses 
14-18  are  therefore  a  digression,  although  intimately  con- 
nected with  what  precedes  and  follows:  The  particle  aWd 
either  introduces  something  just  the  reverse  of  what  pre- 
cedes, and  means  on  the  contrary^  or  simply  something 
different,  and  is  to  be  rendered  hut.  This  verse  admits 
of  two  modes  of  connection  with  what  precedes.  'The  Jews 
did  not  understand  the  ministry  of  Moses,  on  the  contrary., 
their  minds  were  blinded.'  Or,  the  connection  may  be  with 
the  main  idea  of  the  preceding  context.  '  We  use  great  plain- 
ness of  speech,  hut  their  minds  are  blinded.'  That  is,  not- 
withstanding the  clearness  with  which  the  gospel  is  presented 
as  the  substance  and  true  meaning  of  the  old  economy,  still 
the  Jews  were  so  blinded  they  did  not  perceive  it.  In  either 
way  the  sense  is  good.  But  as  it  is  so  much  the  habit  of  the 
apostle  to  connect  wdiat  follows  w4th  what  immediately  pre- 
cedes, and  as  the  figure  of  the  veil,  which  is  not  mentioned  in 
V.  12,  is  continued  in  v.  14,  it  is  most  natural  to  make  the  con- 
nection with  V.  13,  where  that  figure  is  introduced,  especially 
as  Paul's  immediate  object  in  v.  12  is  not  to  exhibit  his  plain- 
ness of  speech  in  opposition  to  the  hebetude  of  the  Jews.  It 
is  the  general  fact  that  under  the  new  dispensation  the  truth 
is  exhibited  ^^lainly  which  he  asserts.  The  blindness  of  the 
Jew^s  is  only  incidentally  introduced.  Their  minds^  vorjfxaTa, 
thoughts^  affectio7is.  It  means  the  whole  inner  man.  Were 
hlinded^  eTrojpco^r/,  properly  loere  rendered  hard  or  callous.  The 
word  is  used  both  of  the  understanding  and  of  the  feelings. 
It  expresses  an  inaptitude  both  of  seeing  and  feeling.  They 
neither  understood  nor  felt  the  power  of  the  truth.  For  nn~ 
til  this  day  remaineth  untaken  away  the  same  veil.  This  is  a 
confii-mation  derived  from  experience  of  the  fact  previously 
stated.  That  the  minds  of  the  Israehtes  were  thus  blinded 
and  hardened,  is  proved  from  the  fact  that  until  this  day  they 
do  not  understand  the  law.  The  same  veil^  i.  e.  the  same  ob- 
scurity. A  veil  was  thrown  over  the  truth  as  first  revealed 
by  Moses,  and  that  same  veil  is  there  still.  The  Israelites  of 
Paul's  day  understood  their  Scriptures  as  little  as  their  fathers 
did.  They  remained  satisfied  with  the  external,  ritual  and 
ceremonial,  wdthout  penetrating  to  what  was  beneath,  or  ask- 
ing the  real  import  of  the  types  and  shadows  of  the  old  econo- 
my. I7i  the  reading  of  the  Old  Testament^  that  is,  when  the 
Old  Testament  (covenant)  is  read.  This  metonymical  use  of 
the  word  covenant  for  the  books  in  which  that  covenant  ia 


VO  II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  14. 

contained,  is  perfectly  familiar  to  our  ears,  as  we  are  accus* 
totned  to  call  the  two  great  divisions  of  the  Scriptures  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  or  covenants ;  but  this  ls  the  only  in- 
stance of  this  use  of  the  word  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
English  version  does  not  in  this  passage  follow  the  order  of 
the  Greek,  which  reads,  "  For  until  this  day  the  same  veil  in 
the  reading  of  the  old  covenant  remains."  Here  the  sense  is 
complete.  The  following  clause,  fxr]  avaKaXv-rrToiJievov  OTL  iv 
XpioTw  Karapyetrat,  admits  of  three  interpretations.  1.  The 
first  is  that  adopted  by  our  translators ;  fxr)  avaKaXv-n-rofjievov  is 
referred  to  the  preceding  clause  {reTnains  \mtaken  away)^ 
and  on  {because^  or  that)  is  read  as  tw^o  words,  o  rt,  lohich^  i.  e. 
w^hich  veil  is  done  away  in  Christ.  So  Luther,  in  his  free 
translation :  Denn  bis  auf  den  heutigen  Tag  bleibet  dieselbige 
Decke  unaufgedeckt  iiber  das  Alten  Testament  wenn  sie  es 
lesen,  welche  in  Christo  aufhoret.  The  great  majority  of 
editors,  however,  read  on.  2.  The  word  dvaKaA-vTrro/i-evoi/,  U7i- 
taken  away^  is,  as  before,  referred  to  KaXi;/A/xa,  veil^  and  ort  is 
rendered  because.  '  The  veil  remains  untaken  away,  because 
it  is  removed  (only)  in  Christ.'  3.  avaKaXvirroix^vov  is  taken 
absolutely,  and  on  is  rendered  that.  '  The  veil  remains,  it  be- 
ing unrevealed  that  it  (viz.  the  old  covenant)  is  done  away 
in  Christ.'  In  favour  of  this  last-mentioned  interpretation  it  is 
urged,  that  the  old  covenaut  was  in  lact  done  away  in  Christ, 
and  that  ignorance  of  that  fact  prevented  the  Jews  under- 
standhig  their  own  Scriptures.  The  sense  therefore  is  good. 
Besides,  the  word  KarapyetVat,  is  done  aioay.,  is  the  proper  term 
to  express  the  abrogation  of  the  law,  but  not  so  suitable  to 
express  the  idea  of  the  removal. of  a  veil,  for  which,  in  v.  16, 
Paul  uses  the  word  Trcptaipetrat,  is  removed.  The  word  Karap- 
yeoj  is  used  in  verses  V.  11  and  13,  to  express  the  passing  away 
of  the  brightness  of  the  face  of  Moses,  and  of  his  ministry  and 
dispensation,  of  which  that  brightness  was  the  symbol,  and 
therefore  it  is  the  more  j^i'obable  that  it  has  the  same  refer- 
ence here.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  it  must  be.  admitted 
that  avaKaXvTTTOjxivov  naturally  agrees  with  KaXv/z/xa,  the  veil  re- 
mains  untaken  away^  and  that  avaKaXvTTTio,  to  uncover  or  un- 
veil.,  is  not  the  common  word  to  express  the  idea  of  making 
known  or  revealing.  See  v.  18,  avaKiikv-n-Toixivio  TrpocrwTrw,  with 
I'Mceiled  face.  The  second  interpretation,  therefore,  above 
mentioned,  is  on  the  whole  to  be  prjferred.  'The  veil  which 
hid  the  meaning  of  the  Old  Testament  remained  unremoved, 
becauee  it  is  done  away  in  Christ,  whom  the  Jews  rejected.' 


TI.   CORINTHIANS   3,  15.16.  11 

The  Old  Testament  Scriptures  are  intelligible  only  when  un- 
derstood as  predicting  and  prefiguring  Christ.  The  present 
Karapyetrat  {is  done  away)  is  used  as  expressing  the  certain 
consequence.  The  knowledge  of  Christ,  as  a  matter  of  fact 
and  as  a  matter  of  course,  removes  the  veil  from  the  Old 
Testament. 

15.  But  even  unto  this  day,  when  Moses  is  read, 
the  veil  is  upon  their  heart. 

But^  dAAct,  on  the  contrary^  i.  e.  so  far  from  being  taken 
away,  the  veil  remains  until  this  day.  WTien  Moses  is  read. 
The  word  yvUa^  when,  is  used  in  the  New  Testament  only 
here  and  in  v.  16.  As  it  occurs  often  in  the  Septuagint,  and 
is  used  in  Exodus  34,  34,  it  is  the  more  probable  that  the  lan- 
guage of  that  version  was  before  the  apostl-e's  mind,  and  de- 
termined the  mode  in  which  he  presents  the  incident  of  Moses 
veiling  his  face,  which,  as  shown  above,  accords  better  with 
the  view  which  the  Septuagint  gives  of  the  original  than  with 
that  presented  in  the  Enghsh  version.  In  Acts  15,  21,  Moses, 
it  is  said,  was  read  every  sabbath  day  in  the  synagogues. 
The  veil,  or,  as  the  article  is  wanting,  a  veil,  was,  however, 
over  his  face.  The  apostle  presents  the  idea  that  the  Jews 
did  not  understand  their  Scriptures  in  two'  forms.  He  says, 
in  V.  14,  that  a  veil  rests  on  the  Old  Testament,  and  here  that 
a  veil  was  over  the  hearts  of  the  Jews.  The  true  source  of 
the  want  of  knowledge  was  subjective.  The  revelation  of 
Christ,  even  in  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  though  ob- 
scure when  compared  with  that  contained  in  the  writings  of 
the  apostles,  was  sufficiently  clear  to  be  understood  if  the 
Jews  had  only  been  in  a  right  state  of  mind.  Hence  our  Lord 
upbraided  his  disciples,  saying,  "  O  fools  and  slow  of  heart  to 
believe  all  that  the  prophets  have  spoken,"  Luke  24,  25.  Com- 
pare Acts  13,  27-29.  The  darkness  was  not  so  much  in  the 
Scriptures,  as  in  their  minds. 

16.  Nevertheless,  when  it  shall  turn  to  the  Lord, 
the  veil  shall  be  taken  away. 

According  to  the  narrative  in  Ex.  34,  29-35,  as  understood 

by  the  Septuagint,  and  as  expounded  by  the  apostle,  the  face 

of  INIoses  was  made  to  shine  by  speaking  with  the  Lord ;  when 

among  the  people  (except  when  delivering  his  message)  he 

4 


12  II.    COIIIXTIIIANS   3,  17. 

wore  a  veil ;  when  he  turned  to  the  Lord  he  removed  the 
veil.  To  this  allusion  seems  to  be  here  nmde.  So  long  as  the 
people  were  turned  from  the  Lord,  the  veil  was  on  their  heart ; 
they  could  not  understand  the  Scriptures ;  as  soon  as  they 
turn  to  the  Lord,  the  veil  is  -removed,  and  all  is  britrht  and 
intelligible.  When  it  shall  turn  to  the  Lord ;  rjvLKa  ^'  av  eVta- 
rpei/o;,  when  it  has  turned,  i.  e.  when  that  conversion  is  accom- 
plished, and  as  often  as  it  occurs.  The  most  natural  subject 
of  the  v',>:b  i-marTpeil/r]  (turned)  is  KapSta  (heart).  A  veil  is  on 
the  heart,  but  when  it  turns  to  the  Lord,  the  veil  is  removed. 
As,  however,  the  apostle  is  speaking  of  the  heart  of  the  Jews, 
and  as  the  tumkig  of  their  heart  is  their  turning,  so  the  sense 
is  the  same  if  the  word  Israel  be  suppHed.  The  veil  is  on  the 
heart  of  the  people,  but  when  the  people  turn  to  the  Lord  the 
veil  is  taken  away.  Calvin  and  others  suj^ply  Moses  as  the 
nominative.  By  Moses,  however,  Calvin  understands  the 
Law.  '  When  Moses  is  read,  a  veil  is  on  the  heart  of  the 
Jews ;  but  when  he,  i.  e.  the  law,  is  directed  to  Christ,  who  is 
the  end  of  the  law,  then  the  veil  is  removed.'  That  is,  as 
soon  as  the  Jews  see  that  their  law  relates  to  Christ,  then 
they  understand  it.  This,  however,  is  obviously  an  unnatural 
interpretation,  as  eTna-Tpeil/r)  expresses  the  turning  of  the  heart 
or  of  the  people  to  God,  and  not  giving  the  law  a  particular 
interppetation.  Stanley,  who  also  says  that  Moses  must  be 
the  nominative  of  the  verb,  makes  him,  however,  the  repre- 
sentative, not  of  the  law,  but  of  the  people.  '  When  Moses 
turns  to  the  Lord  he  strips  off  the  veil.'  The  word  Trcpiaipttrat 
he  gives  an  active  sense,  according  to  its  common  use  in  the 
Septuagint.  This  too  is  less  simple  and  natural  than  the  com- 
mon interpretation  given  above.  The  veil  was  on  the  heart 
of  the  people,  and  when  it,  i.  e.  their  heart,  turns  to  the  Lord, 
it  is  stripped  off ;  Treptaipetrat  is  the  word  used  in  Ex.  34,  34. 
By  Lord  here,  as  the  context  shows,  we  are  to  understand 
Christ.  He  is  the  I^ord  whom  Moses  saw  face  to  face  on 
Mount  Sinai,  and  to  whom  the  Jews  and  al  others  must  turn 
if  they  would  enjoy  the  light  of  salvation. 

17.  Now  the  Lord  is  that  Spirit:  and  where  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  (is),  there  (is)  hberty. 

The  first  point  to  be  determined  with  regard  to  this  diffi- 
cult passage,  is  the  relation  in  which  it  stands  to  what  pre- 
cedes.    It  may  be  either  an  explanation  or  an  inference.     If 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  17.  73 

the  former,  then  it  is  designed  to  show  why  turning  to  the 
Lord  secures  the  romoA'al  of  the  veil  from  the  heart.  It  is 
because  the  Lord  is  the  Spirit,  and  where  the  Spirit  is,  there 
is  liberty,  freedom  from  the  law,  from  its  bondage  and  ob- 
scurities. If  the  latter,  then  the  idea  is,  that  since  the  veil  is 
removed  by  turning  to  the  Lord,  it  follows  as  a  further  conse- 
quence that  by  thus  turning  we  have  liberty.  The  force  of 
the  particle  8e,  which  so  often  introduces  an  explanation,  and 
the  whole  structure  of  the  passage  is  in  favour  of  the  first  in- 
terpretation. 2.  It  is  plain  that  the  Lord  here  means  Christ. 
This  is  clear  not  only  because  the  word  Lorcl^  as  a  general 
rule,  in  the  New  Testament,  refers  to  Christ,  but  also  because 
the  context  in  this  case  demands  that  reference.  In  v.  14  it 
is  said  that  the  veil  is  done  away  in  Christ,  and  in  v.  16  that  it 
is  removed  when  the  heart  turns  to  the  Lord,  and  here  that 
the  Lord  is  the  Spirit.  The  main  idea  of  the  whole  context 
is,  that  the  recognition  of  Jesus  Christ  as  Lord,  or  Jehovah,  is 
the  key  to  the  Old  Testament.  It  opens  all  its  mysteries,  or, 
to  use  the  figure  of  the  apostle,  it  removes  the  veil  which  hid 
from  the  Jews  the  true  meaning  of  their  own  Scriptures.  As 
soon  as  they  turn  to  the  Lord,  i.  e.  as  soon  as  they  recog- 
nize Jesus  Christ  as  their  Jehovah,  then  every  thing  becomes 
bright  and  clear.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  the  Lord  spoken 
of  is  Christ.  This  also  determines  another  point,  viz.  that 
Lord  is  here  the  subject,  and  Spirit  the  predicate.  Paul  says 
that  "The  Lord  is  the  Spirit,"  and  not  "The  Spirit  is  the 
Lord."  The  latter  view  of  the  passage  is  taken  by  many  of 
the  Fathers,  who  regard  it  as  a  direct  assertion  of  the  divinity 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Although  the  words  would  admit  of  this 
interpretation,  it  is  evidently  inconsistent  with  the  context 
It  also  follows  from  the  fact  that  "  Lord  "  here  means  Christ, 
that  it  must  designate  his  person  and  not  his  doctrine.  The 
apostle  does  not  mean  to  say  that  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  or 
the  gospel,  or  new  covenant,  is  the  Spirit.  It  is  true  that  in 
V.  6,  when  contrasting  the  law  and  the  gospel,  he  calls  the  one 
the  letter  and  the  other  the  spirit ;  but  this  does  not  authorize 
us  to  make  Lord  mean  the  gospel  because  the  Lord  is  said  to 
be  the  Spirit.  As  in  the  preceding  verses  Christ  and  Lord 
refer  to  Christ  as  a  person ;  the  word  Lord  must  have  the 
Bame  reference  here.  3.  When  Paul  says  "  The  Lord  is  the 
Spirit,"  he  does  not  mean  to  say  that  '  the  Lord  is  a  spirit,' 
agreeably  to  the  analogy  of  John  4,  24,  where  it  j«  said  "  God 
is  a  spirit."     This  is  not  only  opposed  to  the  forc(?  of  the  arti- 


-^4  II.   COBINTHIANS  3,  17. 

cle  TO  before  irvevixa,  the  Spirit,  but  also  to  the  connection,  a? 
Paul  is  speaking  of  Christ's  office  rather  than  of  his  na- 
ture. It  is  not  his  object  to  say  that  Christ  is  a  spiritual  be- 
ing. Neither  is  the  idea  that  he  is  replenished  with  the  Holy 
Spirit,  so  as  to  be  in  that  sense  and  on  that  account  called  the 
Spirit.  This  is  not  the  meaning  of  the  words,  nor  is  the  idea 
demanded  by  the  context.  The  two  interpretations  which 
the  words  admit  are  either,  first,  that  which  our  translators 
probably  intended  to  indicate  when  they  rendered  t6  irvevixa. 
that  Spirit.  "The  Lord  is  that  Spirit,^'  that  is,  the  spirit 
/  spoken  of  in  v.  6 ;  the  spirit  which  stands  opposed  to  the  let- 
I  ter,  that  which  gives  life  and  righteousness ;  the  inner  sense 
\  of  the  law,  the  saving  truth  and  power  hidden  under  the  types 
and  forms  of  the  Mosaic  economy.  Christ,  says  Calvin,  is  the 
life  of  the  law.  Accedat  anima  ad  corpus:  et  fit  vivus  homo, 
proeditus  intelligentia  et  sensu,  ad  vitales  actiones  idoneus: 
tollatur  anima  a  corpore,  et  restabit  inutile  cadaver,  omnique 
sensu  vacuum.  Thus  if  Christ  is  present  in  the  Mosaic  law, 
it  is  living  and  life-giving  ;  if  he  is  absent  from  it,  it  is  dead  and 
death-dispensing.  Christ  is  therefore  that  spirit  which  ani- 
mates the  law  or  institutions  of  Moses,  and  when  this  is  recog- 
nized, the  veil  which  hides  their  meaning  is  removed.  True 
as  all  this  is,  it  can  hardly  be  expressed  by  the  simple  words 
6  KvpLos  TO  Trvevfjid  eo-rt,  the  Lofd  is  the  Spirit.  The  words  to 
TTvevfxa,  "  tlie  Spirit,"  have  in  the  New  Testament  a  fixed  and 
definite  meaning,  which  is  not  to  be  departed  from  unless  the 
context  renders  such  departure  necessary.  Besides,  this  in- 
terpretation requires  that  "  the  Spirit "  should  mean  one  thing, 
and  "the  Spirit  of  the  Lord"  another,  in  the  same  verse. 
This,  however,  can  hardly  be  admitted.  If  "the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord,"  in  the  last  clause,  means  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  will 
not  be  questioned,  "  the  Spirit,"  in  the  first  clause,  must  have 
the  same  meaning.  The  other  interpretation,  therefore,  must 
be  adopted.  "  The  Lord  is  the  Spirit,"  that  is,  Christ  is  the 
Holy  Spirit ;  they  are  one  and  the  same.  Not  one  and  the 
same  person,  but  one  and  the  same  Being,  in  the  same  sense 
in  which  our  Lord  says,  "  I  and  the  Father  are  one."  It  is  an 
identity  of  essence  and  of  power.  Christ  is  the  Holy  Spirit, 
because,  being  the  same  in  substance,  where  Christ  is,  there 
the  Spirit  is,  and  where  the  Spirit  is,  there  is  Christ.  There- 
fore this  same  apostle  interchanges  the  three  forms  of  expre»- 
Bion  as  synonymous,  "the  Spirit  of  Christ,"  "Christ,"  and 
"th^.  Spirit."    Roia.  8,  9. 10.     The  Holy  Ghost  is  everywhere 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  17.  T5 

in  the  Bible  recognized  as  the  source  of  all  life,  truth,  power, 
holiness,  blessedness  and  glory,  Tiie  apostle,  however,  had 
in  the  context  si:)oken  of  Christ  as  the  source  of  life,  as  deliver- 
ing from  the  death  and  bondage  of  the  law.  He  is  and  does 
this  because  he  and  the  Spirit  are  one ;  and  therefore  wher- 
ever Christ  is,  or  in  other  words,  wherever  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
is,  01-  in  other  words  still,  wherever  the  Spirit  is,  there  is  liber- 
ty/. By  turning  unto  Christ  we  become  partakers  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  living  and  hfe-giving,  because  he  and  the  Spirit  are 
one,  and  Christ  dwells  in  his  people,  redeeming  them  trom  the 
law  and  raakhig  them  the  children  of  God,  by  his  Spirit.  The 
Sjnrit  of  the  Lord^  as  a  designation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  shows 
that  the  Spirit  stands  in  the  same  relation  to  the  Son  that  he 
does  to  the  Father.  Therefore  he  is  called  the  "  Spirit  of 
Christ,"  Rom.  8,  10,  and  "  Spirit  of  His  Son,"  Gal.  4,  6.  And, 
therefore,  also  the  Son  is  said  to  send  and  give  the  Spirit. 
John  16,  7.  All  this  of  course  supposes  the  supreme  divinity 
of  our  Lord.  TJie  liberty  of  which  the  apostle  here  speaks, 
must  be  that  liberty  which  is  consequent  on  the  indwelling  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  that  is,  which  Hows  from  the  apphcation  to  us 
of  the  redemption  purchased  by  Christ.  We  have  not  re- 
ceived, says  the  apostle,  the  Spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear, 
but  the  Spirit  of  adoption.  Rom.  8,  15.  The  liberty  here  in- 
tended is  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God.  Rom. 
8,  21.  It  is  the  liberty  where vdth  Christ  has  made  us  fiee. 
Gal.  5,  1.  This  includes,  1.  Freedom  from  the  law  in  all  its 
forms.  Mosaic  and  moral,  Rom.  6,  14.  7,  4,  i.  e.  freedom  from 
the  obligation  to  fuliil  the  law  as  the  condition  of  our  justidca- 
tion  beiore  God ;  which  involves  freedom  from  condemnation 
and  from  a  legal,  slavish  spirit.  2.  Freedom  from  the  dominion 
of  sin,  Rom.  7,  6,  and  from  the  power  of  Satan.  Heb.  2,  14.  15. 
3.  Freedom  from  the  bondage  of  corruption,  not  only  as  to 
the  soul,  but  as  to  the  body.  Rom.  8,  21-23.  This  liberty, 
therefore,  includes  all  that  is  involved  in  being  the  sons  of 
God.  Incidental  to  this  liberty  is  freedom  from  all  ignorance 
and  error,  and  all  subjection  to  the  authority  of  men,  except 
so  far  as  it  represents  the  authority  of  Christ,  and  therefore 
liberty  of  conscience  or  freedom  from  all  authority  in  matters 
of  religion  other  than  that  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  There  is  not 
only  no  reason  for  restricting  the  idea  of  the  liberty  of  which 
the  apostle  speaks  to  any  one  of  these  forms,  but  the  context 
requires  that  it  should  include  all  that  liberty  of  which  the 
presence  of  the  Spirit  is  the  source  and  the  assurance.     As  no 


76  II.   CORINTHIANS  3,  18. 

man  in  this  life  is  perfectly  and  at  all  times  filled  with  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  never  in  this  life  a  partaker  of  the  full 
liberty  of  which  Christ  is  the  author. 

18.  But  we  all,  with  open  face  beholding  as  in  a 
glass  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  are  changed  into  the  same 
image  from  glory  to  glory,  (even)  as  by  the  Spirit  of 
the  Lord. 

This  verse  is  connected  \^  ith  the  preceding  by  the  simple 
particle  of  transition  Se,  hut.  The  natural  consequence  of  the 
liberty  mentioned  in  v.  17  is  what  is  here  stated.  We  all^  i.  e. 
all  whom  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  has  made 
free.  They  are  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  the  law,  the 
veil  has  been  removed  from  their  face,  and  being  turned  to 
the  Lord,  they  beliold  his  glory  with  openface^  di/aKCKaA-v/z/xeVw 
Trpoa-coTTo),  i.  e.  with  a  face  which  has  been,  and  which  remains 
miveiled.  The  darkness  arising  from  alienation,  ignorance, 
misconception  and  prejudice  has  been  dissipated,  so  that  we 
can  see  clearly.  Beholding  as  17%  a  glass  or  mirror.  This  is 
probably  the  proper  interpretation  of  the  word  here  used. 
KaroTrrptXt^,  in  the  active  voice,  means  to  show  i7i  a  mirror, 
and  in  the  middle,  (the  form  here  used,)  it  generally  means, 
to  see  one^s  self'  i?i  a  mirror.  This  is  its  constant  use  in  the 
classics.  But  in  Philo  it  is  used  to  express  the  idea  of  seeing 
by  means  of  a  mirror.  As  this  sense  is  perfectly  suited  to  this 
passage  it  is  generally  adopted  by  commentators,  because  the 
other  explanations  given  to  the  word  are  either  contrary  to 
usage  or  to  the  context.  Some  render  it  simply  beholding. 
But  to  this  it  is  objected  that  it  overlooks  the  special  etymo- 
logical signification  of  the  ^vord,  and  that  drei/t^oo,  which  occurs 
twice  in  this  chapter,  vs.  7  and  13,  is  the  proper  term  for  that 
idea.  Besides,  this  interpretation  loses  sight  of  the  figure  in- 
volved in  the  passage.  It  is  an  image  we  see,  and  therefore 
we  see,  as  it  were,  by  reflection,  or  as  in  a  glass.  Luther, 
after  Chrysostom,  renders  the  word,  reflecting  as  in  a  mirror. 
This  explanation  is  adopted  by  Bengel,  Billroth,  Olshausen 
and  others.  They  understand  the  apostle  to  say  that  Chris- 
tians reflect,  with  an  unveiled  face,  the  glory  of  the  Lord. 
They  suppose  that  allusion  is  had  to  the  glory  of  God  as  re- 
flected from  the  lace  of  Moses,  which  was  transient  and  veiled ; 
whereas,  in  the  case  of  Christians,  the  gloiy  of  the  Lord  ia 


II.   CORINTHIANS  3,  18.  It 

constantly  and  clearly  manifested  in  them  and  by  them, 
They  reflect  his  image  wherever  they  go.  But,  in  the  first 
place,  this  explanation  is  inconsistent  with  the  si.gnification  of 
the  word,  which  never  means  to  reflect ;  secondly,  it  is  con- 
trary to  the  context.  The  contrast  is  not  between  Moses  and 
Christians,  but  between  the  Jews,  or  the  unconverted,  and 
Christians.  The  former  were  bhnded  by  a  veil,  the  latter  see 
with  an  unveiled  face.  The  one  see  and  the  others  do  not. 
This  is  obviously  the  antithesis  impUed,  and  not  that  the  one 
class  do,  and  the  other  do  not  reflect  the  glory  of  the  Lord. 
In  the  third  place,  the  relation  in  which  this  verse  stands  to 
the  preceding  forbids  this  interpretation.  We  have  here  the 
efiect  of  turning  to  the  Lord.  We  are  delivered  from  the 
law,  we  are  made  free,  we  are  introduced  into  the  presence  of 
the  Lord,  and  enabled  to  behold  his  glory.  And,  finally,  this 
interpretation  overlooks  the  causal  relation  between  the  two 
clauses  of  this  verse.  We  are  transformed  into  the  image  of 
the  Lord  by  beholding  it,  not  by  reflecting  it.  The  common 
interpretation  is  therefore  to  be  preferred ;  beholding  as  in  a 
mirror.  Though  in  comparison  with  the  unconverted  those 
who  are  turned  to  the  Lord  see  clearly,  or  with  an  unveiled 
face,  still  it  is  only  as  in  a  mirror.  1  Cor.  13,  12.  It  is  not 
the  immediate,  beatific  vision  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  which 
is  only  enjoyed  in  heaven,  but  it  is  that  manifestation  of  his 
glory  which  is  made  in  his  word  and  by  his  Spirit,  whose  office 
it  is  to  glorify  Christ  by  revealing  him  to  us.     John  16,  14. 

The  object  which  we  behold  is  the  glory  of  the  Lord^  i.  e. 
as  the  context  evidently  demands,  of  Christ.  The  glory  of 
Christ  is  his  divine  excellence.  The  beUever  is  enabled  to  see 
that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  or  God  manifested  in  the  flesh. 
This  is  conversion.  Whoever  shall  confess  that  Jesus  is  the 
Son  of  God,  God  dwelleth  in  him,  and  he  in  God.  1  John  4,  15. 
The  turning  unto  the  Lord  mentioned  in  the  preceding  verse 
is  recognizing  Christ  as  Jehovah.  This  is  not  only  conversion, 
it  is  religion.  It  is  the  highest  state  of  the  human  soul.  It  is 
eternal  hfe.  John  1.7,  3.  Hence  our  Lord  prays  that  his  dis- 
ciples may  behold  his  glory,  as  the  consummation  of  their 
blessedness.  John  17,  24.  And  the  apostle  John  says  of  all 
who  received  Christ,  that  they  beheld  "his  glory  as  of  the 
only  begotten  of  the  Father,"  John  1,  14.  The  idea  here  pre- 
sented is  more  fully  unfolded  m  the  beginning  of  the  follow- 
iiig  chapter. 

Beholding  his  glory  we  are  changed  into  the  same  image ; 


18  II.   CORINTHIAXS   3,  18. 

vYjv  avry]v  eiKova  jxcrafxopcfiovfjLe^a,  we  are  transformed  into  the 
same  image.  The  verb  is  commonly  construed  with  et?, 
into^  or  Kara,  after ^  but  sometimes,  as  here,  with  the  simple 
accusative.  The  same  image^  that  is,  the  saine  which  we  are 
by  the  Spirit  enabled  to  behold.  '  Beholding  we  are  trans- 
formed ; '  there  is  a  causal  relation  between  the  one  and  the 
other.  This  is  a  truth  everywhere  recognized  in  the  word 
of  God.  While,  on  the  one  hand,  it  is  taught  that  the  natu- 
ral man  cannot  see  the  things  of  the  Spirit,  because  they  are 
spiritually  discerned,  1  Cor.  2,  14,  and  that  this  blindness  is 
the  cause  of  alienation  and  pollution,  Eph.  4,  18 ;  on  the  other 
hand,  it  is  no  less  clearly  taught  that  knowledge  is  the 
source  of  holiness,  Eph.  5,  9 ;  that  spiritual  discernment 
implies  and  produces  congeniality.  We  shall  be  like  Christ, 
because  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is.  1  John  8,  2.  The  conformi- 
ty to  the  image  of  Christ,  as  it  arises  from  beholding  his  glory, 
must  of  course  begin  here.  It  is  the  vision  of  that  glory,  al- 
though only  as  in  a  glass,  which  has  this  transforming  power. 
As  the  vision  is  imperfect,  so  the  transformation  is  imperfect ; 
when  the  vision  is  perfect,  the  conformity  will  be  perfect. 
Rom.  8,  29.  1  John  3,  2.  Only  they  are  Christians,  who  arc 
like  Christ.  The  conformity  of  which  the  apostle  speaks,  al- 
though it  is  spiritual,  as  here  presented,  is  not  confined  to  the 
soul.  Of  the  body  it  is  said,  since  we  have  borne  the  image 
of  the  earthy,  we  shall  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly.  1  Cor. 
15,  49.  Phil.  3,  21.  From  glory  to  glory.  This  may  mean 
that  the  transformation  proceeds  from  glory  (i.  e.  from  the 
glory  of  Christ  as  apprehended  by  us),  and  results  in  glory. 
This  explanation  is  adopted  by  the  Greek  fathers.  Or  the  ex- 
pression indicates  progression  from  one  stage  of  glory  to 
another.  Comp.  Ps.  84,  7,  "They  go  from  strength  to 
strength."  This  is-  the  common  and  most  natural  interpre- 
tation. The  transformation  is  carried  forward  without  inter- 
mission, from  the  iirst  scarce  discernible  resemblance,  to  full 
conformity  to  the  image  of  Christ,  both  as  to  soul  and  body. 
As  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord.  As^  i.  e.  as  might  be  expected 
from  such  an  agent.  It  is  a  work  which  corresponds  to  the 
nature  of  its  author.  J5y  y  the  preposition  is  (xtto,  from,  aa 
indicating  the  source  whence  tliis  glorious  effect  tlou's.  The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord.  The  Greek  is  Kvptov  Trvev/xaro?,  whijh  tlie 
Vulgate  renders  Domini  Spiritu,  an  explanation  which  i.^ 
adoi)ted  by  Augustin,  Calvin  and  many  others,  as  well  as  by 
our  translators.     But  this  inverts  the  order  of  the  words,  and 


II.   CORINTHIANS   3,  18.  79 

is  the  more  unnatural  here  because  in  the  immediately  pre- 
ceding verse  the  apostle  had  said  to  livcvjia  Kvpcov,  Sjnrit  of  the 
Lord;  he  would  therefore  hardly  express  the  same  idea  in  the 
same  connection  by  Kvptov  Trvcu/xaros.  Others  render  the  vrords 
the  Lord  Spirit^  i.  e.  the  Spirit  who  is  Lord.  We  have  in  the 
Old  Testament  and  in  the  apocalypse  the  familiar  phrase,  "  the 
Lord  God;"  but  this  is  only  the  translation  of  B'^n^J:?  tnr,'^  Je- 
hovah Elohim,  Jehovah  who  is  God,  which  the  Septuagint  ren- 
der Kvptos  6  ^^6<i^  the  Vulgate  Dominus  Dens,  and  the  English, 
"  Lord  God."  More  analogous  to  the  i^assage  in  the  text  is  the 
Hebrew  n;n;:^  •'b^N,  which  the  Septuagint  render  Kv'ptos  Kvptos, 
the  Vulgate'  Dominus  Deus,  and  the  English  Lord  God.  In 
Joshua  22,  22,  we  have  the  unusual  combhiation,  rrh'^  t">n'^x  Vs; 
Septuagint,  6  ,^£6?  -^eos  Kvpio's  ecrrt;  and  immediately  after  6 
^eos  ^eos;  Vulgate,  Fortissimus  Deus  Dominus ;  the  English, 
"The  LoKD  God  of  gods."  As  then  in  Hebrew  nini  ib-rs,  in 
Greek  Kvptos  Kvpio%  (or  Kvpio^  6  -^eo?),  in  Lathi,  Dominus  Deus, 
and  in  English,  Lord  God,  all  meaning  God  icho  is  Lord.,  so 
Kvpto?  TTvevfxa  may  mean  the  Spirit  who  is  Lord,  i.  e.  the  divine  ^^ 
Spirit.  This  is  the  explanation  adopted  by  Chrysostom,  The- 
odoret  and  some  of  the  moderns,  in  accordance  with  the  in- 
terpretation which  they  give  of  the  first  clause  of  v.  17,  v/hich, 
as  stated  above,  they  understand  to  mean,  the  Sjnrit  is  Lord, 
Trpos  TO  Ilv€v/xa  iTnarp^cfuov,  Trpos  Kvptoi/  CTrtcrrpe^ets  Kvptos  yap  ro 
Hvev/xa,  koI  ofxo^povov,  ojxoTrpocTKvurjTOV  kol  ofxoovatov  Xlarpt,  kol  tjioj. 
But  as  in  V.  17  Paul  does  not  say  the  Spirit  is  the  Lord,  but 
on  the  contrary  that  the  Lord  is  the  Spirit,  so  it  would  be 
unnatural  to  make  him  here  say  we  are  transformed  by  the 
Spirit  who  is  the  Lord.  If  Lord  is  the  subject  in  tlie  one 
case,  it  must  be  in  the  other.  According  to  others,  the  phrase 
in  question  should  be  rendered  Loi'd  of  the  Spirit,  i.  e.  Christ,  ? 
who  may  be  said  to  be  Lord  of  the  Spirit,  in  a  sense  analogous 
to  that  in  which  God  is  said  to  be  the  God  of  Christ.  That 
is,  as  God  sent  Christ,  and  was  revealed  by  him,  so  Christ 
sends  the  Spirit  and  is  revealed  by  him.  This  is  the  interpre- 
tation of  Billroth,  Olshausen,  Meyer  and  others.  But  the 
"  Lord  of  the  Spirit "  is  an  expression  without  any  scrijitural 
authority  or  analogy.  It  is  only  of  the  incarnate  Son  of  God 
that  the  Father  is  said  to  be  his  God.  T^ere  is  no  grammati- 
cal necessity  for  this  interpretation,  and  it  does  not  accord 
with  V.  17.  Luther,  Beza  and  others  render  the  ph]-ase  utto 
KvpLov  Tri/ev'/xaros,  the  Lord  who  is  the  Spirit.  In  favour  of  this 
interpretation  is,  first,  the  analogy  of  such  expressions  as  airo 
4* 


9 


80  II.   CORINTHIANS  4. 

Seov  TraTp6%^  from  God  icho  is  Father^  Gal.  1,  3  ;  and  secondly^ 
the  authority  of  v.  17.  There  the  apostle  had  said,  '  The  Lord 
is  the  Spirit,'  and  here  he  says,  the  transforming  power  by 
which  we  are  made  like  Christ  flows  from  '  the  Lord  who  is 
the  Spirit.'  The  former  passage  determines  the  meaning  of 
the  latter.  The  Lord  who  is  the  Spirit  means,  the  Lord  who 
is  one  with  the  Spirit,  the  same  in  substance,  equal  in  power 
and  glory ;  who  is  where  the  Spirit  is,  and  does  what  the 
Spirit  does. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

In  vs.  1-6  the  apostle  resumes  the  theme  of  3,  12,  viz.  the  open  and  faithful 
manner  in  which  lie  preached  the  gospel.  In  vs.  7-15  he  shows  that  his 
own  personal  insufficiency  and  suffering  served  to  manifest  more  clearly 
the  power  of  God,  who  rendered  such  a  feeble  instrument  the  means  of 
producing  so  great  effects.  Therefore,  vs.  16-18,  he  was  not  discour- 
aged or  faint-hearted,  but  exultingly  looked  above  the  things  seen  to 
those  unseen. 

As  Paul  had  been  made  a  minister  of  the  new  covenant,  in- 
trusted with  the  ministration  of  righteousness  and  life,  he 
acted  as  became  his  high  commission.  He  w^as  neither  timid 
nor  deceitful.  He  doubted  not  the  truth,  the  power,  or  the 
success  of  the  gospel  which  he  preached ;  nor  did  he  in  any 
way  corrupt  or  conceal  the  truth,  but  by  its  open  proclama- 
tion commended  himself  to  every  man's  conscience,  vs.  1.  2. 
If,  notwithstanding  this  clear  exhibition  of  the  truth,  the  gos- 
pel still  remained  hid,  that  could  only  be  accounted  for  by 
the  god  of  this  world  blinding  the  eyes  of  men.  Nothing 
short  of  this  can  account  for  the  fact ;  for,  says  the  apostle,  we 
preach  Christ  and  not  ourselves,  and  Christ  is  the  image  of 
God.  In  him  there  is  a  revelation  of  the  glory  of  God  to 
which  there  is  nothing  analogous  but  the  original  creation  of 
light  out  of  darkness,  vs.  3-G.  Tliis  treasure,  however,  is  in 
earthen  vessels.  The  gospel  is  the  revelation  of  God,  It  is 
to  do  for  the  world  what  the  creation  of  light  did  for  the  clia- 
otic  earth.  But  we  ministers  are  to  have  none  of  the  glory 
of  the  work.     We  are  nothing.     The  whole  power  is  of  God ; 


II.   CORINTHIANS  4,1.  81 

who  so  orders  events  as  to  make  his  power  apparent.  I  am 
so  perplexed,  persecuted,  down-trodden  and  exposed  to  death, 
as  to  render  it  evident  that  a  divine  power  is  exercised  in  my 
preservation  and  continued  efficiency.  My  continuing  to  live 
and  labour  with  success  is  a  proof  that  Jesus  lives.  This  he 
tells  the  Corinthians  is  for  their  benefit,  vs.  7-12.  Having  the 
same  faith  that  David  had,  he  spoke  with  equal  confidence, 
assured  that  God,  who  raised  up  Christ,  would  not  only  pre- 
serve him  while  in  this  world,  but  also  raise  him  hereafter 
from  the  dead.  As  all  Paul  endured  and  did  was  for  the 
benefit  of  the  Church,  thanks  would  be  rendered  by  the  peo- 
ple of  God  for  his  preservation  and  success,  vs.  13-15.  There- 
fore, adds  this  great  apostle,  I  do  not  faint ;  although  my  out- 
ward man  perishes,  my  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day ; 
for  I  know  that  my  present  afflictions  are  not  only  temporary, 
but  that  they  are  to  be  succeeded  by  an  eternal  weight  of 
glory,  vs.  16-18. 

1.  Therefore,  seeing  we  have  this  ministry,  as  we 
have  received  mercy,  we  faint  not. 

Therefore^  i.  e.  on  this  account.  This  is  explained  by  what 
follows;  seeing  we  have  this  ministry^  that  is,  because  we 
have  it.  In  the  former  chapter  he  had  proclaimed  himself  a 
minister  of  the  new  coAcnant,  not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the 
spirit,  3,  6  ;  a  ministry  far  more  glorious  than  that  of  the  law, 
inasmuch  as  the  law  could  only  condemn,  whereas  the  gospel 
conveys  righteousness  and  life.  The  possession  of  such  an  of- 
fice he  assigns  as  the  reason  why  he  does  not  faint  y  ovk  Ikko.- 
Kovfiev,  we  do  not  turn  out  bad,  or  prove  recreant.  That  is, 
we  do  not  fail  in  the  discharge  of  duty,  either  through  weari- 
ness or  cowardice.  As  ice  have  received  mercy.  The  position 
of  these  words  in  the  text  admits  of  their  being  connected 
either  with  what  precedes  or  with  what  follows.  In  the  for- 
mer case,  the  sense  is,  having  through  the  mercy  of  God  ob- 
tained this  ministry;  in  the  latter,  the  meaning  would  be,  as 
we  have  obtained  mercy  we  faint  not.  The  former  is  almost 
universally  preferred,  both  because  his  not  fainting  is  referred 
to  his  having  so  glorious  an  office,  and  because  he  so  often  re- 
fers to  his  call  to  the  apostleship  as  a  signal  manifestation  of 
the  mercy  and  grace  of  God.  Rom.  15,  15.  16.  1  Cor.  15, 
i).  10.  Eph.  3,  8.  'Having  through  the  mercy  of  God  ob- 
tained such  a  ministry,  we  faint  not.' 


82  II.   CORINTHIANS   4 


2.  But  have  renounced  the  hidden  things  of  dis- 
honesty, not  walking  in  craftiness,  nor  handhng  the 
word  of  God  deceitfully ;  but  by  manifestation  of  the 
truth  commending  ourselves- to  every  man's  conscience 
in  the  sight  of  God. 

JBut^  oAXa,  on  the  C07itrary^  i.  e.  so  far  from  proving  recre- 
ant to  his  duty  as  a  minister  k)f  the  new  covenant  he  acted  in 
the  manner  set  forth  in  this  verse.  The  apostle  in  the  de- 
scription which  he  here  gives  of  his  official  conduct,  evidently 
intends  to  describe  the  false  teachers  in  Corinth.  What  he  de- 
nies of  himself  he  impliedly  affirms  of  them.  First,  Paul  says, 
we  have  renounced^  declared  off  from,  the  hidden  thhigs  of  dis- 
honesty^ TO.  KfjVTTTa  Trjs  ala-xvvrjs.  The  word  aicrxvvr]  (from  aicrj^pds, 
ugly)^  means  either  shame  as  a  feeling,  or  the  cause  of  shame, 
any  thing  disgraceful  or  scandalous.  The  above  phrase  there- 
fore may  mean  either  those  things  which  men  conceal,  or  do  in 
secret,  because  they  are  ashamed  of  them,  or,  secret  scandals  or 
crimes.  It  may  be  taken  in  a  general  sense,  as  including  any 
course  of  conduct  which  men  conceal  from  fear  of  being  dis- 
graced ;  or  in  a  specific  sense  for  secret  immoralities,  or  for 
secret  machinations  and  manosuvres.  The  last  is  probably  the 
true  view,  because  the  emphasis  is  rather  on  secret  than  shame. 
It  was  secrecy  or  concealment,  the  opposite  of  openness  and 
honest  frankness,  that  the  apostle  charges  on  his  opponents. 
In  the  preceding  context  he  had  spoken  of  his  openness  of 
speech  and  conduct,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  this  verse  he 
speaks  of  the  manifestation  of  the  truth,  i.  e.  of  its  open  proc- 
lamation. What  therefore  he  says  he  renounced,  that  which 
he  represents  as  characteristic  of  false  teachers,  is  the  want  of 
openness,  adopting  secret  methods  of  accomplishing  their 
ends,  which  they  would  be  ashamed  to  avow  openly ;  puden- 
das  latebras^  as  Beza  says,  Qwmmie  convenieiites  iis,  qui  tantm 
dignitatis  ministerium  tractant.  JVot  walking  in  craftiness^ 
this  is  an  amplification  of  what  precedes.  A  irai/ovpyos  is  a 
man  who  can  do  every  thing,  and  is  willing  to  do  any  thing  to 
accomplish  his  ends ;  and  hence  iravovpyLa  includes  the  ideas 
of  shrewdness  or  acuteness  in  seeing  how  things  can  be  done, 
and  unscrupulousness  as  to  the  character  of  the  means  to  be 
employed.  It  is  the  quality  manifested  by  Satan  when  he  be- 
guiled Eve,  2  Cor.  11,  3;  which  the  Jews  exhibited  when 
they  endeavoured   to   entrap   our  Lord,  Lake  20,  23;   and 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  3.  83 

which  false  teachers  are  wont  to  exercise  when  they  would 
seduce  the  unwary  into  lieres}^  Eph.  4,  14.  All  such  cunniiig-, 
all  such  sly  and  secret  ways  of  accomplishing  his  ])arposes  P:ail 
renounced.  Nor  handling  the  icord  of  God  de.-eli fully.  The 
word  SoAdco  means  not  only  to  deceive^  but  also  to  falsify.  Tlie 
latter  is  its  meaning  here.  Not  falsifying  or  corrupting  the 
word  of  God,  i.  e.  not  adulterating  it  with  the  doctrines  or 
traditions  of  men.  Comp.  2,  17.  The  gospel  which  Paul 
preached  was  the  word  of  God ;  something  divinely  revealed, 
having  therefore  a  divine,  and  not  merely  human  authority. 
The  apostles  always  thus  speak  with  the  consciousness  of  be- 
ing the  mouth  of  God  or  oi-gans  of  the  Spirit,  so  that  we  can- 
not deny  their  inspiration  without  denying  not  only  their  au- 
thority but  their  integrity.  Hut  by  the  manifestation  of  the 
truth.  This  stands  opposed  to  the  preceding  clauses.  In- 
stead of  availing  ourselves  of  secret  and  cunning  arts,  and 
corrupting  the  word  of  God,  we  declared  it  openly  and  pure- 
ly. The  truths  therefore,  liere  is  not  moral  truth  or  integrity, 
nor  truth  in  general,  but  revealed  truth,  i.  e.  the  word  of  God. 
Gommenddny  ourselves  to  every  man'^s  conscience.  Paul's  op- 
ponents endeavoured  to  recommend  themselves  and  to  secure 
the  confidence  of  others  by  cunning,  and  by  corrupting  the 
gospel ;  but  he  relied  simply  on  the  manifestation  of  the  truth. 
He  knew  that  the  truth  had  such  a  self  evidencing  power  that 
even  Avhere  it  was  rejected  and  hated  it  commended  itself  to 
the  conscience  as  true.  And  those  ministers  who  are  humble 
and  sincere,  who  are  not  wise  in  their  own  conceit,  but  simply 
declare  the  truth  as  God  has  revealed  it,  comuiend  themselves 
to  the  consciences  of  men.  That  is,  they  secure  the  testimony 
of  the  conscience  even  of  wicked  men  in  their  favour.  In  the 
sight  of  God.,  that  is,  he  acted  thus  in  the  sight  of  God. 
This  is  an  assertion  of  the  purity  of  the  motives  which  gov- 
erned his  official  conduct.  He  acted  as  in  the  sight  of  that 
God  before  whose  eye  nothing  unholy  or  selfish  could  stand. 
The  assertion  of  conscious  integrity  is  not  self-praise. 

3.  But  if  our  gospel  be  hid,  it  is  hid  to  them  that 
are  lost. 

Although  the  gospel  is  thus  glorious  in  itself,  and  although 
it  was  clearly  set  forth,  yet  to  some  it  remained  hid.  That  is, 
its  true  character  and  excellence  as  a  revelation  from  God  and 
ox'  God  was  not  apprehended  or  recognized.     The  reason  oj 


84  II.   CORINTHIAlSrS   4,  4. 

/  cause  of  this  fact  was  not  to  be  sought  either  in  the  nature  of 
'  the  gospel,  or  in  the  mode  of  its  exhibition,  but  in  the  state 
and  character  of  those  who  rejected  it.  The  sun  does  not 
cease  to  be  the  sun  although  the  blind  do  not  see  it.  And  if 
any  man  cannot  see  the  sun  on  a  clear  day  at  noon,  he  must 
be  blind.  So  Paul  does  not  hesitate  to  say  that  if  any  man 
does  not  receive  the  gospel  when  clearly  presented,  he  is  lost. 
If  our  gospel  be  hid,  it  is  hid  to  them  that  are  lost,  eV  rots 
aTToXAv/xeVots,  artiong^  or  before  them  who  are  lost.  See  1  Cor. 
,  1,  18,  where  it  is  said  that  the  gospel  is  foolishness  to  them 
that  perish.  The  lost  are  those  who  are  in  a  state  of  perdition 
and  who  are  certain  (if  they  continue  to  reject  the  gospel)  to 
perish  forever.  Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  the  doctrine  of 
this  passage.  A  man's  faith  is  not  a  matter  of  indifference. 
He  cannot  be  an  atheist  and  yet  be  saved.  He  cannot  reject 
the  gospel  and  yet  go  to  heaven  when  he  dies.  This  is  not  an 
arbitrary  decision.  There  is  and  must  be  an  adequate  ground 
for  it.  Atheism  implies  spiritual  death,  the  absence  of  all  that 
constitutes  the  true  life  of  the  soul,  of  all  its  highest  and  best 
asinrations,  instincts  and  feelings.  The  rejection  of  the  gospel 
/is  as  clear. a  proof  of  moral  depravity,  as  inability  to  see  the 
(light  of  the  sun  at  noon  is  a  proof  of  blindness.  Such  is  the 
teaching  of  the  Bible,  and  such  has  ever  been  the  faith  of  the 
church.  Men  of  the  world  cry  out  against  this  doctrine. 
They  insist  that  a  man  is  not  accountable  for  his  opinions, 
lie  is,  however,  accountable  for  the  character  by  which  those 
opinions  are  determined.  If  he  has  such  a  character,  such  an 
inward  moral  state,  as  permits  and  decides  him  to  believe  that 
there  is  no  God,  that  murder,  adultery,  theft  and  violence  are 
right  and  good,  then  that  inward  state  which  constitutes  liis 
character,  and  for  which  he  is  responsible,  (according  to  the 
intuitive  perception  and  universal  judgment  of  men,)  is  repro- 
bate. A  good  infidel  is,  according  to  the  Bible,  as  much  a 
contradiction  as  good  wickedness  or  sweet  bitterness.  It  is 
not  for  nothing  that  infinite  truth  and  love,  in  the  person  of 
our  Lord,  said,  "  He  that  belie veth  not  shall  be  damned." 


4.  In  whom  the  god  of  this  world  hath  bUnded  the 
inmds  of  them  which  believe  not,  lest  the  light  of  the 
glorious  gospel  of  Christ,  who  is  the  image  of  God, 
should  shine  unto  them. 


II.   CORINTHIANS  4,  4.  85 

In  this  verse  the  apostle  assigns  the  reason  why  those  who 
are  lost  do  not  see  the  truth  and  excellence  of  the  gospel.  It 
is  that  the  god  of  this  world  hath  blinded  their  minds.  In 
lohorn  {Iv  ols).  The  relative  is  used  here  as  implying  a  cause 
or  reason.  '  Our  gospel  is  hid  to  them  who  are  lost,  because 
in  them,'  &c.  See  3,  6.  The  god  of  this  icorld^  i.  e.  Satan, 
who  is  called  the  god  of  this  world  because  of  the  power 
which  he  exercises  over  the  men  of  the  world,  and  because  of 
the  servile  obedience  which  they  render  to  him.  They  are 
taVen  captive  by  him  at  his  will.  2  Tim.  2,  26.  It  is  not 
necessary  in  order  that  men  should  serve  Satan,  and  even 
worship  him,  that  they  should  intend  to  do  so,  or  even  that 
they  should  know  that  such  a  being  exists.  1  Cor.  10,  20.  It 
is  enough  that  he  actually  controls  them,  and  that  they  fulfil 
his  purposes  as  implicitly  as  the  good  fulfil  the  will  of  God. 
Not  to  serve  God,  is  to  serve  Satan.  There  is  no  help  for  it. 
If  Jehovah  be  not  our  God,  Satan  is.  He  is  therefore  called 
the  prince  of  this  world.  John  12,  31.  14,  30.  Comp.  Matt. 
4,  8.  9.  Eph.  2,  2.  6,  12.  This  was  one  of  the  designations 
which  the  Rabbins  applied  to  Satan.  The  true  God,  they  said, 
is  Deus  primus,  Satan,  Deus  secundus.  Or  as  old  Calovius 
said,  Dlabolus  est  simia  Dei.  ■<  As  the  Arians  argued  from  the 
fict  that  Satan  is  called  god  of  this  world,  that  Christ's 
being  called  God  is  no  proof  of  his  true  divinity ;  and  as  the 
Mauicheans  quored  the  passage  in  favour  of  their  doctrine  of 
two  eternal  principles,  the  one  good  and  the  other  evil, 
many  of  the  fathers,  including  even  Chrysostom  and  Augus- 
tine, in  violation  of  its  obvious  construction,  make  it  to  mean, 
"  God  hath  blinded  the  minds  of  this  world,  i.  e.  of  unbeliev- 
ers." On  which  Calvin  remarks,  We  see  how  far  the  spirit  of 
controA''ersy  can  lead  men  in  perverting  Scripture.  The  word 
god  may  be  used  figuratively  as  well  as  literally.  That  we 
say  mammon  is  the  god  of  the  world,  or  that  Paul  said  of  cer- 
tain men,  "  their  belly  is  their  god,"  does  not  prove  that  call- 
ing Jehovah  God  is  no  assertion  of  his  divinity.  And  as  to 
the  Manichean  argument,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  when 
Baal  is  called  god  of  the  Syrians,  eternity  and  self-existence 
are  ascribed  to  him,  it  cannot  be  inferred  that  these  attributes 
belong  to  Satan  because  he  is  called  the  god  of  this  world. 
Satan  is  said  to  blind  the  minds  of  those  that  believe  not ;  that 
is,  he  exerts  such  an  influence  over  them  as  prevents  their  ap- 
prehending the  glory  of  the  gospel.  This  control  of  Satan 
over  the  human  mind,  although  so  effectual,  is  analogous  to 


66  II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  4. 

the  influence  of  one  created  intellect  over  another  in  other 
cases,  and  therefore  is  perfectly  consistent  with  free  agency 
and  responsibility.  It  should,  however,  make  us  feel  oar  dan- 
ger and  need  of  divine  assistance,  seeing  that  we  have  to  con- 
tend not  only  against  the  influence  of  evil  men,  but  against 
the  far  more  powerful  influence  of  the  rulers  of  darkness;  the 
pantocrators  of  this  world.  Eph.  6,  12.  The  grammatical 
construction  of  this  clause  is  somewhat  doubtful.  The  words 
are  iv  ols  irvcfiXoiae  ra  vorjfxaTa  rcuv  dTrtcrrwv.  The  common  ex- 
planation makes  the  genitive,  toji/  dTrto-rwv,  virtually  in  apposi- 
tion with  Iv  ots.  '  In  whom,  i.  e.  in  unbelievers,  he  had  blind- 
ed the  minds.'  The  simple  meaning  then  is,  '  The  gospel  is 
hid  to  them  who  are  lost,  because  Satan  hath  blinded  their 
eyes.'  The  lost  and  the  unbelieving  are  identical.  According 
to  this  view  unbelief  is  the  effect  of  the  blinding.  The  same 
idea  is  expressed  if,  according  to  Fritzsche  and  Billroth,  twv 
dTTio-Tcov  be  taken  proleptically.  'Whose  minds  Satan  hath 
blinded  so  that  they  believe  not.'  Comp.  1  Thess.  3,  13,  "To 
establish  your  hearts  unblamable,"  i.  e.  so  that  they  may  be 
unblamable;  and  Phil.  3,21,  (according  to  the  corrected 
text,)  "  changed  like,"  i.  e.  changed  so  as  to  be  like.  Accord- 
ing to  Meyer  this  Avould  require  the  accusative,  to.  voi^/xara 
aina-Ta^  as  the  genitive  of  adjectives  taken  substantively  is 
never  thus  proleptically  used.  His  explanation  is,  'Blinding /J., 
the  eyes  of  unbelievers  is  the  business  of  Satan,  and  this  he|[|/ 
has  done  in  them  who  are  lost.'  According  to  this  view,^^ 
blindness.  c].0£S-Jiot;  precede,  but  follows  unbelief.  Those  who 
will  nqt._believe,  Satan  blinds  so  that  they  cannot  see.  Comp. 
RomTl,  21,  "Their  foolish  heart  was  darkened."  Their  inex- 
cusable folly  was  the  ground  of  their  judicial  blindness.  The 
doctrine  thus  taught  is  one  clearly  recognized  in  Scripture. 
Those  who  resist  the  truth,  God  gives  iip  to  a  reprobate  mind. 
Rom.  1,  24.  28.  The  logical  connection,  however,  is  here  op- 
posed to  this  interpretation.  Paul  had  said  that  the  gospel 
was  hid  to  the  lost.  This  he  accounts  for  by  saying  that  Sa- 
tan had  blinded  their  minds.  The  blindness  therefore  pre- 
cedes the  unbelief  ^|^d  \^  the  cause  ofTf!  "" — ^ 

JLHt  the  light  of  the  glorious  gospel  of  Christy  who  is  the 
image  of  God^  should  shine  unto  them.  This  is  both  the  de- 
sign and  eflect  of  the  blindness  Sjjoken  of.  Satan  intends  by 
the  darkness  which  he  spreads  over  the  minds  of  men,  to  pre- 
vent their  seeing  the  glory  of  Christ.  Lest  the  light.,  ^ojTicr/xo?, 
a  word  which  does  not  occur  in  common  Greek,  but  is  used 


II.   CORINTHIANS    1,  5.  87 

in  the  Septuagint,  Ps.  44,  3,  in  the  phrase  rouclered,  "in  the 
light  of  thy  coLintenance,"  and  Ps.  78,  14,  "He  led  thera  all 
nigflit  with  a  light  of  tire."  The  word  therefore  signifies  the 
brightness  emitted  by  a  radiant  body.  Of  the  glorious  gospel 
of  Christ,  literally,  the  gospel  of  the  glory  of  Christ,  i.  e.  that 
gospel  which  reveals  the  glory  of  Christ.  The  w^ord  80^5, 
glory,  is  not  to  be  taken  as  a  merely  qnaUfying  genitive  of 
evayy^kiov,  gospel.  It  is  the  genitive  of  the  object.  The  glory 
of  Christ  is  the  sum  of  all  the  divine  and  hmnan  excellence 
which  is  centred  in  his  person,  and  makes  him  the  radiant 
point  in  the  universe,  the  clearest  manifestation  of  God  to  his 
creatures,  the  object  of  supreme  admiration,  adoration  and 
love,  to  all  intelligent  beings,  and  especially  to  his  saints.  To 
see  this  glory  is  to  be  saved ;  for  we  are  thereby  transformed 
into  his  likeness  from  glory  to  glory,  8,  18.  Therefore  it  is 
that  Satan,  the  great  adversary,  directs  all  his  energy  to  pre- 
vent men  becoming  the  subjects  of  that  illumination  of  which 
the  gospel,  as  the  revelation  of  the  glory  of  Christ,  is  the 
source.  Who  is  the  image  of  God,  i.  e.  who  being  God  rei> 
resents  God,  so  that  he  who  hath  se^^n  the  Son  hath  seen  the 
Father  also.  John  14,  9.  12,  45.  Christ,  as  to  his  divine  na- 
ture, or  as  the  Logos,  is  declared  to  be  the  brightness  of  the 
Father's  glory,  Heb.  1,  3,  to  be  in  the  form  of  God  and  equal 
with  God,  Phil.  2,  0,  and  perhaps  also  Col.  1,15;  but  here  it 
is  the  incarnate  Logos,  the  exalted  Son  of  God  clothed  in  our 
nature,  who  is  declared  to  be  the  image  of  God,  because  in  him 
dwells  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily.     Col.  2,  9. 

5.  For  we  preach  not  oui'sslves,  but  Christ  Jesus 
the  Lord ;  and  ourselves  your  servants  for  Jesus'  sake. 

The  connection  indicated  by  the  particle  for  is  with  the 
main  idea  of  the  preceding  verse.  '  Our  gospel,'  says  Paul, 
'is  the  gospel  of  the  glory  of  Christ,  for  we  do  not  preach 
ourselves,  but  him.'  To  preach  one's  self  is  to  make  self  the 
end  of  preaching ;  that  is,  preaching  with  the  design  to  at- 
tract to  ourselves  the  admiration,  the  confidence  or  homage 
of  men.  This  Paul  declares  he  did  not  do,  but  he  preached 
Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  His  object  in  preaching  was  to  bring 
men  to  recognize  Jesus  the  son  of  Marv  as  Christ,  i.  e.  as  him 
whom  Moses  and  the  prophets  designated  as  the  Messiah, 
and  consequently  that  this  Jesus  w^as,  had  done,  is  doing,  and 
ivould  hereafter  do,  all  that  had  been  asserted  or  p'-edicted  of 


88  II.    CORINTHIANS   4,  6. 

the  Messiah ;  and  further  that  he  is  Lord  in  that  sense  in 
which  every  tongue  in  heaven,  and  on  earth,-  and  under  the 
earth  shall  confess  that  he  is  Lord.  The  great  end  of  Paul's 
l)reaching,  therefore,  was  to  bring  men  to-  receive  and  ac- 
knowledge Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the  Messiah  and  as  the  su- 
preme Lord,  the  maker  of  heaven  and  earth.  This  is  the 
only  proper  end  of  preaching.  It  is  the  only  way  by  which 
men  can  be  made  either  virtuous  or  religious.  It  is  the  only 
way  in  which  either  the  true  interests  of  society  or  the  salva- 
tion of  souls  can  be  secured.  To  make  the  end  of  preaching 
the  inculcation  of  virtue,  to  render  men  honest,  sober,  benevo- 
lent and  faithful,  is  part  and  parcel  of  that  wisdom  of  the 
world  that  is  foolishness  with  God.  It  is  attempting  to  raise 
fruit  without  trees.  When  a  man  is  brought  to  recognize 
Jesus  Christ  as  Lord,  and  to  love  and  worship  him  as  such, 
then  he  becomes  like  Christ.  What  more  can  the  moralist 
want  ?  Paul  cared  little  for  the  clamour  of  the  Greeks  that  he 
should  preach  wisdom  and  virtue.  He  knew  that  by  preach- 
ing Christ  he  was  adopting  the  only  means  by  which  men  can 
be  made  wise  and  virtuous  here  and  blessed  hereafter. 

Aiid  ourselves  your  servants  (slaves)  for  Jesus'^  sake. 
Paul  presented  Christ  as  Lord;  himself  as  a  servant.  A 
servant  is  one  who  labours,  not  for  himself,  but  for  another. 
Paul  did  not  labour  for  himself,  but  for  the  Corinthians.  For 
Jesus'^  sake.  The  motive  which  influenced  him  to  devote  him- 
self to  the  service  of  the  Corinthians  was  the  love  of  Christ. 
Here  again  the  wisdom  of  the  world  would  say  the  proper 
motive  would  be  a  desire  for  their  good.  Paul  always  puts 
God  before  man.  A  regard  for  the  glory  of  Christ  is  a  far 
higher  motive  than  regard  for  the  good  of  men ;  and  the  for- 
mer is  the  only  true  source  of  the  latter.  The  ideal  of  a 
Christian  minister,  as  presented  in  this  jDregnant  passage,  is, 
that  he  is  a  preacher  of  Christ,  and  a  servant  of  the  church, 
governed  and  animated  by  the  love  of  Jesus. 

6.  Por  God,  who  commanded  the  Kght  to  shine  out 
of  darkness,  hath  shined  in  our  hearts,  to  (give)  the 
light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ. 

There  are  two  different  views  taken  of  the  meaning  of  this 
verse.     First,  it  may  be  understood  to  assign  the  reason  why 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  6.  89 

Paul  was  the  servant  of  the  Corinthians.  He  devoted  himself 
to  their  service,  because  God  had  revealed  to  him  the  knowl- 
edge of  Christ,  in  order  tliat  he  might  communicate  that 
knowledge  to  others.  According  to  this  view  the  connection 
is  with  the  last  clause  of  v.  5.  "I  am  your  servant,  o-t,  ^6- 
cause^''''  &c. ;  "in  our  hearts,"  means  in  Paul's  heart;  and 
TTpos  ^wTKTjxov  (for  the  light)  is  equivalent  to  7rp6s  to  ^mri^uv, 
to  diffuse  the  light.  Second,  it  ma}^  be  understood  to  state 
the  reason  why  Paul  preached  Christ.  '  We  preach  not  our- 
selves, but  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  ort,  because  in  him  is  re- 
vealed the  glory  of  God.'  In  this  case  the  connection  is  with 
the  tirst  clause  of  v.  5,  and  not  with  the  last ;  "  in  our  hearts  " 
means  in  the  hearts  of  believers;  and  7rp6s  ^a/rio-/Aov  (for  light) 
means,  as  our  version  expresses  it,  to  give  us  the  light.  The 
end  or  design  of  God's  shining  into  our  hearts  is  that  we 
should  apprehend  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ. 
The  latter  of  these  interpretations  is  adopted  by  Calvin,  the 
former  by  Luther  and  by  almost  all  the  modern  commenta- 
tors. With  regard  to  the  former  it  must  be  admitted  that 
the  sense  is  good  and  consistent  with  the  meaning  of  the 
words.  It  accords  also  with  Gal.  1,  16,  where  the  apostle 
says  that  God  had  revealed  his  Son  in  him  that  he  might 
preach  him  among  the  Gentiles.  The  following  considera- 
tions, however,  are  in  favour  of  the  other  view  of  the  passage. 
1.  The  connection  is  better.  The  main  idea  of  the  context  is 
that  Paul  preached  Christ,  and  therefore  it  is  more  natural  to 
understand  him  to  give  the  reason  for  so  doing,  than  why  he 
served  the  Corinthians,  which  is  a  subordinate  matter.  2. 
The  phrase  "  in  our  hearts "  is  much  more  naturally  under- 
stood to  mean  "in  the  hearts  of  behevers"  than  in  Paul's  own 
heart.  It  is  indeed  possible  that  here,  as  in  3,  2,  the  plural 
(hearts)  may  be  used  in  reference  to  the  apostle  himself. 
Still  this  is  admissible  only  when  the  context  requires  it.  Had 
Paul  meant  himself  he  would  probably  have  said  "in  our 
heart,"  as  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Galatians  1,  16  he  says,  ev 
c/xot,  in  me.  To  explain  the  plural  form  here  by  assuming 
that  Paul  means  himself  and  Timothy  is  contrary  to  his  uni- 
form habit  of  speaking  for  himself.  His  epistles  are  his  and 
not  Timothy's.  3.  The  former  interpretation  supposes  ^carto-- 
/ao?  to  have  a  different  meaning  here  from  what  it  has  in  v.  4. 
There  it  means  light,  here  it  is  made  to  mean  the  act  of  com- 
'municating  light.  But  if  ^wrwr/xos  rov  ivayycXiov  means  the 
light  which  flows  from  the  gospel  (or  the  gospel  itself  as  lumi- 


90  II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  6. 

nous),  then  <^(otio-;u,os  t^<?  yvwo-ews  means  the  light  of  which  the 
knowledge  of  Christ  is  the  source,  (or  that  knowledge  as 
light.)  In  V.  4,  it  is  said  that  Satan  hath  blinded  the  eyes  of 
unbelievers  so  that  they  cannot  see  the  light  of  ihe  gospel  of 
the  glory  of  Christ.  Here  it  is  said  that  God  has  enlightened 
us  so  that  we  do  see  it.     In  Test.  XII.  Patr.  p.  578,  it  is  said, 

TO   cfi(i)<S  TOV  KOCTflOV,  TO  SoS^€V  iv  Vfxlv  TTpoS   cfnOTLCTIXOV  TTCIVTOS  avBpfsiTTOV^ 

the  light  of  the  world  deposited  in  you^for  the  {subjective)  il- 
lumination  of  every  mcrn.  4.  It  is  an  additional  reason  in  fa- 
vour of  this  interpretation  that  it  suits  the  antithesis  between 
vs.  4  and  6.  The  gospel  is  hid  to  one  class  of  men,  but  God 
has  opened  the  eyes  of  another  class  to  see  its  glory.  Here, 
as  elsewhere,  particularly  in  1  Cor.  2,  14,  the  apostle  recog- 
nizes a  twofold  illumination,  the  one  external  by  the  word,  to 
which  Satan  renders  unbelievers  blind ;  and  the  other  internal 
by  the  Spirit,  whereby  we  are  enabled  to  see  the  glory  which 
is  objectively  revealed. 

The  literal  translation  of  this  passage  is,  '  God  who  com- 
manded the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  who  shined  into 
our  hearts.'  Something  must  be  supplied  to  complete  the 
sense.  We  may  read  either  '  It  is  God  Avho  commanded,  &c., 
who  shined  into  our  hearts ; '  oi",  '  God  who  commanded  the 
light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  is  he  who  shined,'  &c.  There 
is  an  ob^^ous  reference  to  the  work  of  creation  as  recorded  in 
Genesis.  Darkness  originally  brooded  over  chaos,  until  God 
said.  Let  there  be  light.  So  spiritual  darkness  broods  over 
the  minds  of  men,  until  God  shines  into  their  hearts.  Shiiicd 
into  our  hearts.  The  word  Xa/xTrco,  means  either,  to  be  lumi- 
nous;  or  as  here,  to  illuminate^  or  cause  lights  as  the  analogy 
with  the  physical  creation,  just  referred  to,  requires.  The 
idea  is  not  that  God  becomes  luminous  in  us,  but  that  he  pro- 
duces light  in  our  hearts.  The  design  of  this  inward  illumina- 
tion is  expressed  by  the  Avords  Trpos  cfyiDTiaixbv  t7]<s  yvcao-ews,  which, 
according  to  the  former  of  the  two  interpretations  mentioned 
above,  means,  to  the  shining  abroad  of  the  knowledge,  ifcc. 
He  illuminates  us  that  we  may  diifuse  light,  and  thus  illumi- 
nate others.  According  to  the  second  interpretation,  tlie 
meaiiihg  is,  to  give  us  the  light  of  the  knowledge.  God  illu- 
minates our  minds  so  that  we  apprehend  that  light  which 
ilows  from  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God,  or  whicli  con- 
sists in  that  knowledge.  By  t/ie  glory  of  God  is  of  course 
meant  the  divine  majesty  or  excellence,  which  is  the  proper 
object  of  admiration  and  adoration.     In  the  face  of  Jesits 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  1.  91 

Christ  J  the  position  of  these  words  and  the  sense  require 
that  they  should  be  connected  with  the  word  glory^  notwith- 
standing the  omission  in  the  Greek  of  the  connecting  article 
(t^s).  It  is  the  glory  of  God  as  revealed  in  Christ  that  men 
are  by  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Ghost  enabled  to  see. 
There  are  two  important  truths  involved  in  this  statement. 
First,  that  God  becomes  in  Christ  the  object  of  knowledge. 
The  clearest  revelation  of  the  fact  that  God  is,  and  what  he  is, 
is  made  in  the  person  of  Christ,  so  that  those  who  refuse  to 
see  God  in  Christ  lose  all  true  knowledge  of  him.  "  No  man 
hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the  only  begotten  Son,  who  is  in 
the  bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him,"  John  1,  18. 
"  Neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he 
to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  him,"  Matt.  11,  27. 
"  Whosoever  denieth  the  Son,  the  same  hath  not  the  Father," 
1  John  2,  23.  2  John  9.  John  15,  23.  Insignis  locus,  says 
Calvin,  unde  discimus  Deum  in  sua  altitudine  non  esse  investi- 
gandum  (habitat  enim  lucem  inaccessibilem),  sed  cognoscen- 
dum  quatenus  se  in  Christo  patefacit.  Proinde  quicquid  extra 
Christum  de  Deo  cognoscere  appetunt  homines,  evanidum  est, 
vagantur  enim  extra  viam.  .  .  .  Nobis  utiUus  est  Deum  con- 
spicere,  qualis  apparet  in  Filio  unigenito,  quam  arcanam  ejus 
essentiam  investigare.  The  other  truth  here  taught  is,  that 
this  knowledge  of  God  in  Christ  is  not  a  mere  matter  of  intel- 
lectual apprehension,  which  one  man  may  communicate  to  an- 
other. It  is  a  spiritual  discernment,  to  be  derived  only  from 
the  Spirit  of  God.  God  must  shine  into  our  hearts  to  give  us 
this  knowledge.  Matt.  16,  17.  Gal.  1,  16.  1  Cor.  2,  10.  14. 
As  the  glory  of  God  is  spiritual,  it  must  be  spiritually  dis- 
cerned. It  is  therefore  easy  to  see  why  the  Scriptures  make 
true  religion  to  consist  in  the  knowledge  of  Christ,  and  why 
they  make  the  denial  of  Christ,  or  want  of  faith  in  him  as  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,  a  soul-destroying  sin.  If  Christ  is  God, 
to  know  him,  is  to  know  God ;  and  to  deny  him,  is  to  deny 
God. 


7.  But  we  have  this  treasure  in  earthen  vessels, 
that  the  excellency  of  the  power  may  be  of  God,  and 
not  of  us. 

This  treasure  is  not  the  light  or  inward  illumination  spokeu 
of  in  V.  6,  but  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  which  Paul  had  r©. 


92  II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  8.9. 

ceived,  and  of  which  he  had  spoken  in  such  exalted  terms.  It 
was  a  ministration  of  life,  of  power,  and  of  glory.  It  revealed 
the  grandest  truths.  It  produced  the  most  astonishing  effects. 
It  freed  men  from  the  condemnation  and  power  of  sin ;  it 
transformed  them  into  the  image  of  Christ ;  it  delivered  them 
from  the  power  of  the  god  of  this  world,  and  made  them  par- 
takers of  eternal  life.  These  are  effects  which  infinitely  tran« 
scend  all  human  power ;  and  to  render  this  fact  conspicuous 
God  had  committed  this  treasure  to  earthen  vessels.  By 
earthen  vessels  is  not  meant  frail  bodies,  but  w^eak,  suffering, 
perishing  men,  because  it  is  not  on  account  of  the  frailty  of 
the  body  merely  that  ministers  are  so  incompetent  to  produce 
the  effects  which  flow  from  their  ministrations.  The  apostle 
means  to  present  the  utter  disproportion  between  the  Adsible 
means  and  the  effects  produced,  as  proof  that  the  real  efficien- 
cy is  not  in  man,  but  in  God.  The  excellency  of  the  power^ 
i.  e.  the  exceedingly  great  power,  the  w^onderful  efficiency  of 
the  gospel.  3Iay  5e,  i.  e.  may  be  known  and  acknow^ledged 
to  be,  of  God^  i.  e.  to  flow  from  him  as  its  source,  and  not 
from  us.  Although  what  the  apostle  here  says  is  true  of  all 
ministers,  yet  he  had,  no  doubt,  special  reference  to  himself 
and  to  his  owm  peculiar  circumstances.  He  had  magnified  in 
the  highest  degree  his  office,  but  he  himself  was  a  poor,  w^eak, 
persecuted,  down-trodden  man.  This,  he  says,  only  renders 
the  powder  of  God  the  more  conspicuous,  not  only  in  the  suc- 
cess of  my  ministry,  but  in  my  preservation  in  the  midst  of 
dangers  and  sufferings  which  it  seems  impossible  any  man 
could  either  escape  or  bear.  It  is  to  show^,  on  the  one  hand, 
how  A^eak  he  is,  how  truly  a  mere  earthen  vessel,  and,  on  the 
other,  how  great  and  manifest  God's  power  is,  that  in  the  fol- 
lowing verses  he  contrasts  his  trials  and  his  deliverances. 

8.  9.  (We  are)  troubled  on  every  side,  yet  not  dis- 
tressed ;  (we  are)  perplexed,  but  not  in  despair ;  per- 
secuted, but  .not  forsaken ;  cast  down,  but  not  de- 
stroyed. 

Our  version  supplies  the  words  we  are^  turning  the  parti- 
ciples into  verbs,  which,  in  the  Greek,  are  all  connected  with 
the  verb  ex"/xei/  {toe  have)  in  the  preceding  verse.  'We, 
troubled,  perplexed,  perseauted  and  cast  down,  have,  tt:c.* 
Oil  every  side,  iv  vravrt,  in  every  way  and  on  every  occasioiu. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  10.  98 

These  words  belong  to  all  the  clanses,  and  not  merely  to  the 
first.  He  was  not  only  troubled,  but  perplexed  and  persecut- 
ed, iv  7rai/Tt,  in  every  icay.  Troubled^  hut  not  distressed^  -^At- 
^ofxevoL,  aX)C  ov  (rrevoxiopovfJievoL,  "pressed  for  room,  but  still 
having  room."  The  figure  is  that  of  a  combatant  sore  pressed 
by  his  antagonist,  but  still  finding  room  to  turn  himself.  JPer- 
2)lexed,  but  i%ot  in  despair^  constantly  doubtful  what  way  to 
take,  and  yet  always  finding  some  way  open.  The  word  omo- 
pio)  (ttTTopos  ciftt)  means  to  be  at  a  loss  what  to  say  or  do ;  iia- 
TTopioi  is  intensive,  to  be  absolutely  shut  up  so  as  to  have  no 
way  or  means  available.  Persecuted^  hut  not  forsaken  ;  that 
is,  although  God  allowed  men  to  persecute  him,  and  seek  to 
destroy  his  life  and  usefulness,  yet  he  never  deserted  him  or 
gave  him  up  to  the  power  of  those  who  thus  followed  him. 
Cast  down^  hut  not  destroyed.  The  allusion  is  still  to  a  com- 
bat. Paul  was  not  only  persecuted  or  pursued  by  his  enemies, 
but  actually  overtaken  by  them  and  cast  to  the  ground,  but 
not  killed.  When  they  seemed  to  have  him  in  their  power, 
God  delivered  him.  This  occurred  so  often,  and  in  cases  so 
extreme,  as  to  make  it  manifest  that  the  power  of  God  was 
exerted  on  his  behalf.  No  man  from  his  own  resources  could 
have  endured  or  escaped  so  much.  There  is  in  these  verses 
an  evident  climax,  which  reaches  its  culmination  in  the  next 
succeeding  sentence.  He  compares  himself  to  a  combatant, 
first  hardly  pressed,  then  hemmed  in,  then  pursued,  then  ac- 
tually cast  down.  This  Avas  not  an  occasional  experience,  but 
his  life  was  like  that  of  Christ,  an  uninterrupted  succession  of 
indignities  and  sufferinar. 


10.  Always  bearing  about  in  the  body  the  dying 
of  the  Lord  Jesus,  that  the  Ufe  also  of  Jesus  might  be 
made  manifest  in  our  body. 

We  constantly  illustrate  in  our  person  the  sufferings  of 
Christ.  We  are  treated  as  he  was  treated ;  neglected,  de- 
famed, despised,  maltreated;  oppressed  with  hunger  and 
thirst,  and  constantly  exposed  to  death.  Always  hearing 
about.  Wherever  he  went,  among  Jews  or  Gentiles,  in  Jeru- 
salem and  Ephesus ;  in  all  his  journeyings,  he  met  every- 
where, from  all  classes  of  persons,  the  same  kind  of  treatment 
which  Christ  himself  had  received.  In  his  body.  This^  is 
said  because  the  reference  is  to  his  external  trials  and  suflier- 


H  II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  10. 

Lngs,  and  not  to  his  internal  anxieties  and  sorrows.  The  dy* 
Ing  of  [tliH  Lord]  Jesus.  Tlie  word  Kuptov,  of  the  Lord^  is 
not  found  in  the  majority  of  the  ancient  manuscripts,  and  is 
therefore  omitted  in  the  later  editions  of  the  Greek  Testa- 
ment. If  this  ^vord  be  left  out,  the  two  clauses  more  nearly 
correspond.  The  dying  of  Jesus  then  answers  to  the  life  of 
Jesus  in  the  follo\\ing  clause.  The  word  veV/owo-ts  is  used 
figuratively  in  Rom.  4,  19,  "the  deadness  of  Sarah's  womb." 
Here  it  is  to  be  taken  literally.  It  means  properly  a  slaying 
or  putti7ig  to  death^  and  then  violent  death,  or  simply  death. 
IVie  death  of  Jesus  does  not  mean  death  on  his  account;  but 
such  death  as  he  suffered.  Comp.  1,  5.  Though  the  reference 
is  principally  to  the  dying  of  Christ,  and  the  cUmax  begun  in 
the  preceding  verse  is  here  reached,  yet  his  other  sufferings 
are  not  to  be  excluded.  "The  mortification  of  Jesus,"  says 
Calvin,  "  includes  every  thing  which  rendered  him  (i.  e.  Paul) 
despicable  before  men."  Paul  elsewhere  refers  to  his  con- 
stant exposure  to  death  in  terms  as  strong  as  those  which  he 
hei-e  uses.  In  Rom.  8,  36  he  says,  "  We  are  killed  all  the  day 
long,"  and  1  Cor.  15,  31,  "I  die  daily."  Compare  also  1  Cor. 
4,  9.  2  Cor.  11,  23.  The  death  or  sufferings  of  Christ  were 
constantly,  as  it  were,  reproduced  in  the  experience  of  the 
apost!e.  In  the  use  of  another  figure  he  expresses  the  same 
idea  in  Gal.  6,  17.  "I  bear  in  my  body  the  marks  of  the 
Lord  Jesus."  The  scars  which  I  bear  in  my  body  mark  me  as 
the  soldier  of  Chi'ist,  and  as  belonging  to  him  as  my  divine 
Master,  and  as  suffering  in  his  cause. 

lliat  the  Ufe  also  of  Jesus  might  he  made  m^anifest  in  our 
body.  This  expresses  the  design  of  God  in  allowing  Paul  to 
be  thus  persecuted  and  involved  in  the  constant  danger  of 
death.  The  treasure  of  the  gospel  was  committed  not  to  an 
angel,  but  to  Paul,  an  earthen  vessel,  and  he  was  pressed, 
persecuted,  cast  down,  and  beset  with  deadly  perils,  in  order 
that  his  preservation,  his  wonderful  efficiency  and  astonishing 
success,  should  be  a  constant  proof  that  Jesus  lives,  and  not 
only  exercises  a  providential  care  over  his  servants,  delivering 
them  out  of  all  their  perils,  but  also  attends  their  labours  with 
his  own  divine  efficiency.  Paul's  deliverances,  and  the  effects 
of  his  preaching,  made  it  mrnifest  that  J  csus  lives.  In  Rom. 
15,  18  the  a))0.stle  says,  "I  will  not  dare  to  speak  of  those 
things  which  Christ  hath  not  wrought  by  me,  to  make  the 
Gentiles  obedient,  by  word  and  deed;"  and  in  Gal.  2,  8,  "He 
that  wrought  effectually  in  Peter  to  the  apostleship  of  the  cii> 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  11.  95 

cumcision,  the  same  was  mighty  in  me  towards  the  Gentiles." 
As  the  life  of  every  believer  is  a  manifestation  of  the  life  of 
Christ,  (for  it  is  not  we  that  Hve,  but  Christ  liveth  in  ns,  Gal. 
2,  20,)  so  also  was  the  apostolic  life  of  Paul.  As  the  life  of 
Christ,  however,  is  not  only  manifested  in  the  spiritual  life  of 
his  followers,  and  in  the  deliverance  and  success  of  his  minis- 
ters, as  it  is  not  only  made  known  in  rescuing  them  from 
deadly  perils,  but  is  hereafter  to  be  more  conspicuously  re- 
vealed in  deUvering  them  from  death  itself,  it  seems  from  v. 
14  that  Paul  includes  the  resurrection  in  the  manifestation  of 
the  life  of  Jesus  of  which  he  here  speaks.  We  die  (daily,  and 
at  last,  literally)  in  order  that  the  life  of  Christ  may  be  re- 
vealed. This  passage  is  thus  brought  into  unison  with  Rom. 
8,  1 V,  "  If  so  be  that  we  suffer  with  him,  that  we  may  be  also 
glorified  together;"  and  with  2  Tim.  2,  11,  "If  we  be  dead 
with  him,  we  shall  live  with  him."  See  1  Peter  4,  13.  14. 
Rom.  6,  8.  9.  John  14,  19,  "Because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also." 
The  association  is  natural  between  deliverance  from  the  dan- 
ger of  death,  and  the  ultimate  deliverance  from  death  itself. 
The  following  verses  show  that  this  association  actually  exist- 
ed in  the  apostle's  mind,  and  that  both  were  regarded  as 
manifestations  of  the  life  of  Christ,  and  therefore  proofs  that 
he  still  lives.  In  our  body  y  this  does  not  mean  simply  in  me, 
A  special  reference  is  made  to  the  body,  because  Paul  was 
speaking  of  bodily  sufferings  and  death. 

11.  Tor  we  which  Hve  are  always  deUvered  unto 
death  for  Jesus'  sake,  that  the  Hfe  also  of  Jesus  might 
be  made  manifest  in  our  mortal  flesh. 

This  is  a  confirmation  and  explanation  of  what  precedes. 
Paul  constantly  bore  about  the  dying  of  Jesus,  for  he  was  al- 
ways delivered  to  death  for  Jesus'  sake.  He  was,  as  he  says 
1  Cor.  4,  9,  w?  cTTt^^avartos,  as  one  condemned^  and  constantly 
expecting  death.  We  which  are  alive  /  i7/>tcts  ol  ^uivre^^  we  the 
living,  i.  e.  although  living,  and  therefore,  it  might  seem,  not 
the  subjects  of  death.  Death  and  life  are  opposed  to  each 
other,  and  yet  in  our  case  they  are  united.  Though  living  we 
die  daily.  The  words  in  this  connection  do  not  mean  '  as  long 
as  we  live,'  or,  '  we  who  are  alive,'  as  in  1  Thess.  4,  1 7,  where 
thoy  designate  the  living  as  a  class  distinguished  from  the 
dead.  They  mark  the  peculiarity  of  Paul's  condition  as  living 
although  constantly  delivered  to  death. 
5 


96  II.    CORINTHIANS   4,  12.13. 

That  the  life  aUo  of  Jesus  might  he  made  manifest  in  our 
mortal  flesh.  The  only  variation  between  this  and  the  cor- 
responding clause  of  the  preceding  verse  is,  that  here  the 
phrase  in  our  mortal  flesh  is  substituted  for  in  our  body.  The 
word  body  does  not  of  itself  involve  the  idea  of  weakness  and 
mortality,  but  the  w^ord  flesh  does..  Hereafter  we  are  to  be 
clothed  with  bodies,  but  not  with  flesh  and  blood.  The  con- 
trast, therefore,  between  the  power  of  the  life  of  Christ,  and 
the  feebleness  of  the  instrument  or  organ  through  which  that 
life  is  revealed,  is  enhanced  by  saying  it  was  manifested  in  our 
mortal  flesh.  In  himself  Paul  was  utter  weakness ;  in  Christ 
he  could  do  and  suffer  all  things. 

12.  So  then  death  worketh  in  us,  but  life  in  you. 

This  verse  expresses  the  conclusion  or  the  result  of  the 
preceding  exhibitions.  So  then  I  have  the  suffering  and  you 
the  benefit.  I  am  constantly  dying,  but  the  life  of  Jesus 
manifested  in  me  is  operative  for  your  good.  The  death  and 
life  here  spoken  of  must  be  the  same  as  in  vs.  10.  11.  The 
death  is  Paul's  sufferings  and  dying ;  the  life  is  not  his  physi- 
cal life  and  activity  by  which  the  life  of  Christ  is  represented, 
but  the  divine  life  and  efficiency  of  Jesus.  Death  and  life  are 
personified.  The  one  is  represented  as  operative  in  Paul ;  the 
other  in  the  Corinthians.  The  divine  power  manifested  in  the 
support  of  the  apostle,  and  in  rendering  his  labours  so  success- 
ful, was  not  primarily  and  principally  for  his  benefit,  but  for 
the  benefit  of  those  to  whom  he  preached.  It  was,  however, 
to  him  and  to  them  a  consolation  that  his  labours  were  not  in 
vain.  There  is  no  analogy  between  this  passage  and  1  Cor.  4, 
8-10,  where  the  apostle  in  a  tone  of  irony  contrasts  his  own 
condition  with  that  of  the  Corinthians,  "Now  ye  are  full,  now 
ye  are  rich,  ye  have  reigned  as  kings  without  us,"  &c.,  and 
therefore  there  is  no  propriety  in  understanding  the  apostle 
here  to  represent  the  Corinthians  as  living  at  their  ease  while 
he  was  persecuted  and  afflicted.  According  to  this  view,  life 
here  signifies  a  state  of  enjoyment  and  prosperity,  and  death 
the  opposite.  But  it  is  plain  from  the  connection  that  the 
life  spoken  of  is  "  the  life  of  Jesus  "  which  was  manifested  in 
ihi}.  apostle,  the  fruits  of  which  the  Corinthians  enjoyed. 

13.  We  having  the  same  spirit  of  faith,  according 


II.   CORINTHIAN^S   4,  13.  97 

as  it  is  written,  I  believed,  and  therefore  liave  I  spoken ; 
we  also  believe,  and  therefore  speak. 

The  afflictions  and  dangers  to  which  the  apostle  was  ex- 
posed, were  adapted  to  discourage  and  e\en  to  diive  him  to 
despair.  He,  however,  was  not  discouraged ;  but  ha^  ing  the 
same  faith  which  of  old  animated  the  Psalmist,  he  also,  as  Da- 
vid did,  proclaimed  his  confidence  in  God.  Our  version  omits 
the  connecting  particle,  8e,  which  expresses  the  contrast  be- 
tween what  follows  and  what  precedes.  'We  are  delivered 
unto  death,  but  having,'  &g.  The  same  spirit  of  faith.  "  The 
spirit  of  faith "  may  be  a  periphrase  for  faith  itself;  or  the 
word  spirit  may  refer  to  the  human  s^^irit,  and  the  whole  mean 
*  having  the  same  beUeving  spirit.'  It  is  more  in  accordance 
with  scriptural  usage,  and  especially  with  Paul's  manner,  to 
make  spirit  refer  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  so  often  designat- 
ed from  the  effects  which  he  produces.  He  is  called  the 
Spirit  of  adoption,  Rom.  8,  15;  the  Spirit  of  wisdom,  Eph.  1, 
17;  Spirit  of  grace,  Heb.  10,  29;  Spirit  of  glory,  1  Pet.  4,  14. 
The  apostle  means  to  say  that  the  same  blessed  Spirit  which 
was  the  author  of  faith  in  David  he  also  possessed.  Accord- 
ing  as  it  is  written^  i.  e.  the  same  faith  that  is  expressed  in 
the  passage  where  it  is  written,  '  I  believed,  therefore  have  I 
spoken.'  This  is  the  language  of  David  in  Ps.  116,  10.  The 
Psalmist  was  greatly  afflicted;  the  sorrows  of  death  com- 
passed him,  the  pains  of  hell  gat  hold  of  him,  but  he  did  not 
despair.  He  called  on  the  Lord,  and  he  helped  him.  He  de- 
livered his  soul  from  death,  his  eyes  from  tears,  and  his  feet 
from  falling.  David's  faith  did  not  fail.  He  believed,  and 
therefore,  in  the  midst  of  his  afflictions,  he  proclaimed  his 
confidence  and  recounted  the  goodness  of  the  Lord.  Paul's 
experience  was  the  same.  He  also  was  sorely  tried.  He  also 
retained  his  confidence,  and  continued  to  rely  on  the  promises 
of  God.  The  apostle  follows  the  Septuagmt  in  the  passage 
quoted.  The  Hebrew  expresses  the  same  idea  in  a  rather  dif- 
ferent form.  "I  believed /or  I  speak."  In  either  way,  speak- 
ing is  represented  as  the  effect  and  proof  of  faith.  See  Alex- 
ander on  the  Psalms. 

We  also  believe^  therefore  we  al^  speaJc.  As  Paul's  faith 
was  the  same,  its  effect  was  the  same.  The  faith  of  David 
made  him  proclaim  the  fidelity  and  goodness  of  God.  The 
faith  of  Paul  made  him,  despite  all  the  suffering  it  brought 
upon  him,  proclaim  the  gospel  with  fuU  assurance  of  its  truth 


98  II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  14. 

tmd  of  his  own  participation  of  its  benefits.  This  clause,  "  we 
also  b(;lieve,"  depends  on  the  participle  at  the  beginning  of 
the  verse.  '  Having  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  author  of  faith,  we 
speak.'  The  interpretation  here  given  of  this  passage  is  the 
common  one.  Calvin  and  many  other  commentators  take  a 
very  different  view.  They  say  that  by  the  same  fiith  is  to  be 
understood,  not  the  same  the  Psalmist  had,  but  the  same  that 
the  Corinthians  had.  Paul,  says  Calvin,  is  to  be  understood 
as  saying,  '  Although  there  is  a  great  difference  between  my 
circumstances  and  yours;  although  God  deals  gently  Avith 
you  and  severely  with  me,  yet,  notwithstanding  this  difference, 
we  have  the  same  faith ;  and  where  the  faith  is  the  same,  the 
inheritance  is  the  same.'  But  this  supposes  that  the  design 
of  the  preceding  part  of  the  chapter  is  to  contrast  the  exter- 
nal condition  of  Paul  with  that  of  the  Corinthians  ;  and  it 
supposes  that  by  ice  is  meant  we  Christians,  whereas  the  apos- 
tle evidently  means  himself  '  We  are  persecuted,  cast  down, 
and  delivered  to  death,  but  we,  having  the  same  faith  with 
David,  do  as  he  did.  We  retain  our  confidence  and  continue 
to  confess  and  to  proclaim  the  gospel.'  It  is  his  own  experi- 
ence and  conduct,  and  not  those  of  the  Corinthians,  that  Paul 
is  exhibiting:. 


14.  Knowing,  that  he  which  raised  up  the  Lord 
Jesus,  shall  raise  up  us  also  by  Jesus,  and  shall  present 
(us)  with  you. 

That  this  is  to  be  understood  of  the  literal  resurrection, 
and  not  of  a  mere  deliverance  from  dangers,  is  evident,  1.  Be- 
cause wherever  a  figurative  sense  is  preferred  to  the  literal 
meaning  of  a  word  or  proposition,  the  context  or  nature  of 
the  passage  must  justify  or  demand  it.  Such  is  not  the  case 
here.  Tliere  is  nothing  to  forbid,  but  every  thing  to  favour 
the  literal  interpretation.  2.  Because  the  figurative  interpre- 
tation cannot  be  carried  through  without  doing  violence  to 
the  passage  and  to  the  analogy  of  Scripture.  "To  present  us 
with  you  "  cannot  be  made  to  mean,  '  to  exhibit  us  with  you 
as  rescued  irom  danger.'  3.  The  figurative  interpretation 
rests  on  false  assum[>tions.  It  assumes  that  Paul  confidently 
expected  to  survive  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  and  there- 
fore could  not  say  he  expected  to  be  raised  from  the  dead. 
In  this  very  connection,  however,  he  says  he  longs  to  be  ab- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  U.  99 

Bent  from  the  body  and  to  be  present  with  the  Lord ;  as  he 
said  to  the  Philippians,  at  a  later  period  of  his  career,  that  he 
had  a  desire  to  depart  and  to  be  with  Chiist.  Again,  it  is 
said  that  according  to  the  true  reading  of  the  passage,  Paul 
says  he  knows  we  shall  be  raised  up  icith  (not  hy)  Christ,  and 
therefore  he  cannot  refer  to  the  literal  resurrection.  But  ad- 
mittmg  the  reading  to  be  as  assumed,  to  be  raised  up  with 
Christ  does  not  mean  to  be  raised  contemporaneously  with 
him,  but  in  fellowship  with  him,  and  in  virtue  of  union  with 
him.  This  figurative  interpretation,  therefore,  although  at 
first  adopted  by  Beza  and  advocated  by  many  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished modern  commentators,  is  generally  and  properly 
rejected. 

The  apostle  here  indicates  the  ground  of  the  confidence 
expressed  in  the  preceding  verse.  He  continued  to  speak, 
i.  e.  to  preach  the  gospel,  notwithstanding  his  persecutions, 
knowing^  i.  e.  because  he  was  sure  that  he  and  his  fellow- 
behevers  should  share  in  its  glorious  consummation.  The 
word  to  know  is  often  used  in  the  sense  of  being  convinced  or 
sure  of.  Rom.  5,  3.  1  Cor.  15,58.  It  is  assumed  as  a  fact 
which  no  Christian  did  or  could  doubt,  that  God  had  raised 
up  Jesus  from  the  dead.  What  Paul  was  fully  persuaded  of 
is,  that  God  would  raise  us  (i.  e.  him,  for  he  is  speaking  oi"  him- 
self) icith  or  hy  Jesus.  The  majority  of  the  ancient  manu- 
scripts and  versions  here  read  o-uV,  with^  instead  of  Sta,  by^  and 
that  reading  is  adopted  in  most  critical  editions.  Both  Ibrms 
of  representation  occur  in  Scripture.  Believers  are  said  to  be 
raised  up  hy  Christ  and  icith  Christ.  Our  Lord  often  say^, 
"I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day;"  and  in  1  Cor.  15,  21, 
the  resurrection  is  said  to  be  (8ta)  by  man,  i.  e.  hy  Christ. 
On  the  other  hand,  believers  are  said  to  be  raised  up  icith  oi 
in  him.  1  Cor.  15,  22.  Eph.  2,  6.  Col.  3,  3.  4.  1  Thess.  5,  10. 
The  two  modes  of  statement  are  nearly  coincident  in  meaning 
The  believer  is  united  to  Christ,  as  a  member  of  his  body,  and 
therefore  a  partaker  of  his  life.  It  is  in  virtue  of  this  union, 
or  of  this  participation  of  life,  which,  the  apostle  expressly 
teaches,  extends  to  the  body  as  Avell  as  to  the  soul,  Rom.  8, 
8-11.  1  Cor.  6,  13-20.  15,  21.  22,  that  our  bodies  are  raised 
from  the  dead.  It  is  therefore  immaterial  whether  we  say  we 
are  raised  by  him,  i,  e.  by  the  power  of  his  life,  or,  we  are 
raised  with,  i.  e.  in  union  with  him,  and  in  virtue  of  that 
union.  As  our  resurrection  is  due  to  this  community  of  life, 
our  bodies  shall  be  like  bis  glorious  body.  Phil.  3,  21.     And 


lUO  II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  14. 


this  congeniality  and  conformity  aj'e  included  in  the  idea 
which  is  exjoressed  by  sayincr,  we  shall  be  raised  up  with  him, 
i.  e.  in  his  fellowship  and  likeness.  The  resurrection,  there- 
fore, was  the  one  great,  all-absorbing  object  of  anticipation 
and  desire  to  the  early  Christians,  and  should  be  to  us.  It  is 
then  that  we  shall  be  introduced  into  the  glorious  liberty  of 
the  sons  of  God ;  it  is  then  that  the  work  of  redemption  shall 
be  consummated,  and  Christ  be  admired  in  his  saints.  And 
present  us  together  icith  you.  To  present,  irapiaT-qiii^  is  to 
cause  to  stand  near  or  by,  to  offer  to.  We  are  required  to 
present  our  members  (Rom.  6,  13,)  or  our  bodies  (Rom.  12,  1,) 
unto  God ;  Paul  says  he  desired  to  present  the  Corinthians  as 
a  chaste  virgin  unto  Christ,  11,  2 ;  God  is  said  to  have  recon- 
ciled Rs  to  present  us  holy  in  his  sight.  Col.  1,  22;  and  Jude 
(v.  24)  gives  thanks  to  him  who  is  able  to  present  us  faultless 
before  the  presence  of  liis  glory  with  exceeding  joy.  This  is 
the  idea  here.  It  is  true  that  in  the  following  chapter  it  is 
said  that  we  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of 
Christ,  whence  many  suppose  that  the  apostle  means  here  that 
having  been  raised  from  the  dead,  believers  shall  be  presented 
before  the  tribunal  of  the  final  judge.  But  the  idea  of  judg- 
ment is  foreign  from  the  connection.  It  is  a  fearful  thing  to 
stand  before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ,  even  with  the  cer- 
tainty of  acquittal.  The  apostle  is  here  exulting  in  the  assur- 
ance that,  however  persecuted  and  down-trodden  here,  God, 
who  had  raised  up  Jesus,  would  raise  him  up  and  present  him 
with  all  other  believers  before  the  presence  of  his  glory  w^ith 
exceeding  joy.  This  it  was  that  sustained  him,  and  has  sus- 
tained so  many  others  of  the  afflicted  of  God's  people,  and 
given  them  a  peace  which  passes  all  understanding. 

The  resurrection  of  Christ  here,  as  in  other  passages,  is 
represented  as  the  pledge  of  the  resurrection  of  his  people. 
"  He  that  raised  Christ  from  tlie  dead  shall  also  quicken  your 
mortal  bodies,"  Rom.  8,  11.  "God  hath  both  iiiised  up  the 
Lord,  and  will  also  raise  us  up  by  his  own  power,"  1  Cor.  6, 
14.  "  Christ  is  risen  from  the  dead  and  become  the  first  fruits 
of  them  that  slept ;  lor  ...  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive," 
15, 19-22.  "  For  if  we  believe  that  Jesus  died  and  rose  again, 
even  so  them  also  which  sleep  in  Jesus  Avill  God  bring  with 
him,"  1  Tiiess.  4,  14.  See  also  John  11,25.  Eph.  2,6.  Col. 
2,  12.  In  the  view  of  the  sacred  writers,  therelore,  the  glori- 
ous resurrection  of  believers  is  as  certain  as  the  resurrection 
of  Clirist,  and  that  not  simply  because  God  who  has  raised  up 


II.  CORINTHIANS  4,  15.  101 

Jesus  has  promised  to  raise  his  followers,  but  because  of  the 
union  between  him  and  them.  They  are  in  him  in  such  a 
sense  as  to  be  partakers  of  his  life,  so  that  his  life  of  necessity 
secures  theirs.  If  he  lives,  they  shall  live  also.  Now  as  the 
fact  of  Christ's  resurrection  was  no  more  doubted  by  the 
apostles,  who  had  seen  and  heard  and  even  handled  him  after 
he  rose  from  the  dead,  than  their  own  existence,  we  may  see 
how  assured  was  their  confidence  of  their  own  resurrection  to 
eternal  life.  And  as  to  us  no  event  in  the  history  of  the  world 
is  better  authenticated  than  the  fact  that  Christ  rose  from  the 
dead,  we  too  have  the  same  ground  of  assurance  of  the  resur- 
rection of  those  who  are  Christ's  at  his  coming.  Had  we  only 
the  faith  of  the  apostle,  we  should  have  his  constancy  and  his 
joy  even  in  the  midst  of  the  greatest  auctions. 

15.  For  all  things  (are)  for  your  sakes,  that  the 
abundant  grace  might  through  the  thanksgiving  of 
many  redound  to  the  glory  of  God. 

In  the  preceding  verse  Paul  had  expressed  his  confident 
hope  of  being  delivered  even  from  the  grave  and  presented 
before  God  in  glory  with  his  Corinthian  brethren,  for  all 
things  are  for  your  sakes.  They  were  to  be  partakers  of  the 
salvation  which  he  proclaimed  and  for  which  he  suffered.  All 
he  did  and  all  he  suffered  was  for  them.  According  to  this 
interpretation  the  all  things  are  limited  to  all  things  of  which 
he  had  been  speaking,  viz.  his  sufferings,  his  constancy,  and 
his  deliverance.  In  1  Cor.  3,  21,  however,  he  says  in  a  much 
more  comprehensive  sense,  *A11  things  are  yours,  whether 
things  present  or  things  to  come.'  Hence  some  understand 
the  expression  with  the  same  latitude  in  this  passage :  '  I  ex- 
pect to  be  presented  with  you^  for  all  things  are  for  your 
sakes.'  But  this  does  not  agree  with  the  latter  part  of  the 
verse.  He  evidently  means  all  that  he  did,  and  suffered,  and 
experienced.  '  They  are  for  your  sake,  that  (tm,  in  order  that) 
the  abundant  grace  or  favour  manifested  to  me,  might, 
through  the  thanksgiving  of  many,  i.  e.  through  your  grati- 
tude, called  forth  by  your  experience  of  the  blessings  flowing 
from  my  labour  and  sufferings,  as  well  as  from  my  deliverance, 
redound  to  the  glory  of  God.'  This  is  the  sense  of  the  pas- 
sage, according  to  the  construction  of  the  original,  adopted 
by  our  translators.     Paul  says  that  the  favour  shown  him  re- 


J02  II.    CORIl^THlAiS'-S    4,  16. 

dounds  the  more  to  the  glory  of  God,  because  others  besides 
himself  are  led  to  give  thanks  for  it.  This  supposes  that  in 
the  Greek,  8ta  rwv  TrXetoVwv,  k.t.X.  are  to  be  connected  with 
Trepto-crcvoTy,  might  abound  through.  Those  words,  however, 
may  be  connected  with  irXc-ovacraa-a.^  the  grace  rendered  abund- 
ant  by  many.  This  may  mean  either  that  the  favour  shown 
the  apostle  was  the  more  abundant  because  so  many  interced- 
ed in  his  behalf.  Comp.  1,  11,  and  Phil.  1,  19.  "  I  know  that 
this  shall  turn  to  my  salvation  through  your  prayer."  Or  the 
meaning  may  be,  '  The  favour  shown  me,  rendered  abundant, 
or  greatly  multiplied,  through  the  participation  of  many.'  In 
the  one  case,  Paul  says  the  grace  was  the  greater  because  so 
many  prayed  for  him ;  in  the  other,  it  was  the  greater  because 
so  many  enjoyed  the  fruits  of  it.  The  passage  admits  of  either 
of  these  constructions  and  explanations  ;  and  whichever  is  pre- 
ferred the  general  idea  is  the  same.  The  church  is  one.  If 
one  member  be  honoured,  all  the  members  rejoice  with  it. 
If  Paul  was  redeemed  from  his  enemies,  all  the  church  gave 
thanks  to  God.  A  favour  shown  to  him  was  a  favour  shown 
to  all,  and  was  thereby  multiplied  a  thousand-fold  and  ren- 
dered a  thousand-fold  more  prolific  of  thanksgiving  unto  God. 
Whichever  construction  be  adopted,  Tr^pia-a-^vcrrj  is  to  be  taken 
transitively,  as  in  Eph.  1,  8.  1  Thess.  3,  12.  'Grace  causes 
thanksgiving  to  abound.' 

IG.  For  which  cause  we  faint  not ;  but  though  our 
outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inward  (man)  is  renewed 
day  by  day. 

For  lohich  cause^  that  is,  because  we  are  sure  of  a  glorious 
resurrection,  and  are  satisfied  that  our  present  sufferings  and 
labours  wiU  advance  the  glory  of  God.  We  faint  not.,  we  do 
not  become  discouraged  and  give  up  the  conflict.  On  the 
contrary,  though  his  outward  man,  his  whole  physical  consti- 
tution, perish^  Sta^^eiperat,  be  utterly  worn  out  and  wasted 
away  by  constant  sufiering  and  labour,  yet  the  inward  man., 
the  spiritual  nature,  is  renewed,  i.  e.  receives  new  life  an?! 
vigour,  day  by  day.  By  'inward  man'  is  not  meant  simply 
the  soul  as  distinguished  from  the  body,  but  his  liiglier  nature 
— his  soul  as  the  subject  of  the  divine  life.  Rom.  7,  22. 
Eph.  3,  16.  Of  no  unholy  man  could  it  be  said  in  tlio  sense 
ot  the  apostle  that  his  inward  man  was  daily  rencvecl.     It  is 


II.   CORINTHIANS   4,  17.  103 

not  of  reneAred  supplies  of  animal  spirits  or  of  intellectual 
vigour  that  the  apostle  speaks,  but  of  the  renewal  of  spiritual 
strength  to  do  and  suffer.  This  constant  renewal  of  strength 
is  opposed  to  fainting.  '  We  faint  not,  but  are  renewed  day 
by  day^^  VH-^P^-  '<^'t  rjixepa.  This  is  a  Hebraism,  Gen.  39,  10. 
Ps.  68,  19.  familiar  to  our  ears  but  foreign  to  Greek  usage. 
The  supplies  of  strength  came  without  fail  and  as  they  were 
needed. 


17.  For  our  light  affliction,  which  is  but  for  a  mo- 
ment, worketh  for  us  a  far  more  exceeding  (and)  eter- 
nal weight  of  glory. 

This  is  the  reason  why  we  faint  not.  Our  afflictions  are 
light,  they  are  momentary,  and  they  secure  eternal  glory. 
Every  thing  depends  upon  the  standard  of  judgment. 
Viewed  absolutely,  or  in  comparison  v.-ith  the  sufferings  of 
other  men,  Paul's  afflictions  were  exceedingly  great.  He 
was  poor,  often  without  food  or  clothing ;  his  body  was  weak 
and  sickly  ;  he  was  homeless ;  he  was  beset  by  cruel  enemies ; 
he  w^as  repeatedly  scourged,  he  was  stoned,  he  was  impris- 
oned, he  was  shipwrecked,  robbed,  and  counted  as  the  off 
scouring  of  the  earth ;  he  was  beyond  measure  harassed  by 
anxieties  and  cares,  and  by  the  opposition  of  false  teachers, 
and  the  corruption  of  the  churches  which  he  had  planted  at 
such  expense  of  time  and  labour.  See  1  Cor.  4,  9-13,  and  2 
Cor.  11,  23-29.  These  afflictions  in  themselves,  and  as  they 
affected  Paul's  consciousness,  were  exceedingly  great ;  for  he 
says  himself  he  was  pressed  out  of  measure,  above  strength, 
so  that  he  despaired  even  of  life.  1,  8.  He  did  not  regard 
these  afflictions  as  trifles,  nor  did  he  bear  them  with  stoical 
indifference.  He  felt  their  full  force  and  pressure.  When 
five  times  scourged  by  the  Jews  and  thrice  beaten  wdth  rods, 
his  physical  torture  was  as  keen  as  that  w^hich  any  other  man 
would  have  suffered  under  similar  inflictions.  He  was  not  in- 
sensible to  hunger,  and  thirst,  and  cold,  and  contempt,  and 
ingratitude.  His  afflictions  were  not  light  in  the  sense  of  giv- 
ing little  pain.  The  Bible  does  not  teach,  either  by  precept 
or  example,  that  Christians  are  to  bear  pain  as  though  it  were 
not  pain,  or  bereavements  as  though  they  caused  no  sorrow. 
Unless  afflictions  prove  real  sorrows,  they  will  not  produce  the 
fruits  of  sorrow.  It  was  only  by  bringmg  these  sufferings 
5* 


104  II.   CORINTHIANS  4,  17. 

into  comparison  with  eternal  glory  that  they  dwindled  into 
insignificance.  So  also  when  the  apostle  says  that  his  aiflic 
tions  were  for  a  moment,  it  is  only  when  compared  with  eter- 
nity.  They  were  not  momentary  so  far  as  the  present  life 
was  concerned.  They  lasted  from  his  conversion  to  his  mar- 
tyrdom. His  Christian  life  was  a  protracted  dying.  But 
what  is  the  longest  life  to  everlasting  ages  ?  Less  than  a  sin- 
gle second  to  threescore  years.  The  third  source  of  consola- 
tion to  the  apostle  was  that  his  afflictions  would  secure  for 
him  eternal  glory,  i.  e.  the  eternal  and  inconceivable  excel- 
lence and  blessedness  of  heaven.  This  is  all  the  words  Karep- 
ya^€Tttt  7]fuv  express.  Afflictions  are  the  cause  of  eternal  glory. 
Not  the  meritorious  cause,  but  still  the  procuring  cause.  God 
has  seen  tit  to  reveal  his  purpose  not  only  to  reward  with  ex- 
ceeding jo}^  the  afflictions  of  his  people,  but  to  make  those 
afflictions  the  means  of  working  out  that  joy.  This  doctrine 
is  taught  in  many  passages  of  Scripture.  Matt.  19,  29.  Rom. 
8,  17.  2  Tim.  2,  12.  13.  1  Pet.  1,  6.  4,  13.  Rev.  7,  14.  It  is 
not,  however,  suffering  in  itself  considered  which  has  this  ef- 
fect ;  and  therefore  not  all  suffering ;  not  self  inflicted  suffer- 
ing, not  punishment,  but  only  such  sufferings  which  are  either 
endured  for  Christ's  sake,  or  which  when  imposed  for  the  trial 
of  our  faith  are  sustained  with  a  Christian  spirit.  We  are, 
thei-efore,  not  to  seek  afflictions,  but  when  God  sends  them 
we  should  rejoice  in  them  as  the  divinely  appointed  means  of 
securing  for  us  an  eternal  weight  of  glory.  Our  Lord  calls  on 
those  who  were  persecuted  to  rejoice  and  be  exceeding  glad, 
Matt.  5,  12 ;  so  does  the  apostle  Peter,  4,  13 ;  and  Paul  often 
asserts  that  he  gloried  or  rejoiced  in  his  afflictions.  Phil.  2,  17. 
Col.  1,  24. 

The  expression  to  TrapavrUa  iX.a<ppbv  Trjs  .SA.ti//€cjs,  the  7710- 
mentary  lightness  of  affliction^  exhibits  the  adverb  {TrapavTiKo) 
used  as  an  adjective,  and  the  adjective  (ikacfipov)  used  as  a  sub- 
stantive. Comp.  8,  8.  1  Cor.  1,  25.  Wetstein  and  other  col- 
lectors furnish  abundant  illustrations  of  this  usage  from  the 
Greek  writers.  In  this  carefully  balanced  sentence,  ika<f)p6v, 
lights  stands  opposed  to  ySapos,  weighty  and  irapavTUa^  momen- 
tary^ to  atoWoi/,  eternal.  In  Hebrew  the  same  word  signities 
to  be  heavy^  and  to  be  glorious^  and  the  literal  meaning  of  the 
Hebrew  word  for  glory  is  weighty  which  may  have  suggested 
the  peculiar  expression  "  weight  of  glory."  The  words  »ca.y 
vTrepl3oX:rjv  els  vTrep/SoXrjv^  according  to  excess  unto  excess^  in  the 
sense  of  exceeding  exceedingly^  (one  of  Paul's  struggles  with 


II.   CORINTHIAISrS  4,  18.  105 

the  impotency  of  language  to  express  his  conceptions,)  may 
be  taken  as  an  adjective  qualification  of  jSdpo?  So^t/?,  weight  of 
glory.  This  is  the  explanation  adopted  by  our  translators, 
who  render  the  phrase,  "far  more  exceeding,  and  eternal 
weight  of  glory."  There  is,  however,  no  koI  {and)  in  the 
text.  K  this  view  be  adopted,  it  would  be  better  therefore 
to  take  "  eternal  weight  of  glory  "  as  one  idea.  The  eternal 
glory  exceeds  all  limits.  The  words  in  question,  however, 
may  be  connected  adverbially  with  Karcpya^erat,  as  proposed 
by  Meyer  and  De  Wette.  '  Our  light  afflictions  work  exceed- 
ingly, i.  e.  are  beyond  measure  efficacious  in  securing  or  pro- 
ducing an  eternal  weight  of  glory.' 

18.  While  we  look  not  at  the  things  which  are 
seen,  but  at  the  things  which  are  not  seen :  for  the 
things  which  are  seen  (are)  temporal ;  but  the  things 
which  ai'e  not  seen  (are)  eternal. 

The  participial  clause  with  w^hich  this  verse  begins  (ft^ 
o-KOTTovVrcjv  y]ii.Ziv)  may  have  a  causal  force.  '  Our  light  afflic- 
tions are  thus  efficacious  because  we  look  not  at  the  things 
which  are  temporal.'  This,  however,  is  hardly  true.  The 
afflictions  of  Christians  do  not  work  out  for  them  eternal 
glory,  because  their  hearts  are  turned  heavenward.  It  is 
therefore  better  to  understand  the  apostle  as  simply  express- 
ing the  condition  under  which  the  effect  spoken  of  in  v.  17  is 
produced.  This  is  the  idea  expressed  in  our  version  by  the 
word  while.  Afflictions  have  this  salutary  operation  while 
(i.  e.  provided  that)  we  look  at  the  things  which  are  eternal. 
This  clause  thus  serves  to  designate  the  class  of  persons  to 
whom  even  the  severest  afflictions  are  light,  and  for  whom 
they  secure  eternal  glory.  It  is  not  for  the  worldly,  but  for 
those  w^hose  hearts  are  set  on  things  above.  The  word  trans- 
lated looh^  (TKOTrio)^  is  derived  from  o-kottos  (scopus,  scojje), 
meaning  the  mark  or  goal  on  which  the  eye  is  fixed,  as  in 
I*!iil.  3,  14,  Kara  (tkottov  StcuKw,  I  2>^ess  toward  the  mark. 
Therefore  looking  here  means  making  things  unseen  the  goal 
on  which  our  eyes  are  fixed,  the  end  toward  which  the  atten- 
tion, desires  and  efforts  are  directed.  As  is  usual  w^ith  the 
a[)()Stle,  he  states  both  what  is  not,  and  what  is,  the  absorb- 
id.x,  object  of  the  believer's  attention.  Not  the  visible^  but  the 
invUible  ;  i.  e.  not  the  world  and  the  things  of  the  world,  but 


106  II.  CORINTHIANS  5. 

the  things  which  pertain  to  that  state  which  is  to  us  now  in 
visible.  The  reason  why  the  latter,  and  not  the  former  class 
of  objects  do  thus  engross  the  believer,  is  that  the  things  seen 
are  temporal^  or  rather,  temporary^  lasting  only  for  a  time; 
whereas  the  things  unseen  are  eternal.  Few  passages  in 
Paul's  ^^'ritings  exhibit  so  clearly  his  inward  exercises  in  the 
midst  of  sufferings  and  under  the  near  prospect  of  death.  He 
was,  when  he  wrote  what  is  here  written,  in  great  affliction. 
He  felt  that  his  life  was  in  constant  and  imminent  danger,  and 
that  even  if  delivered  from  the  violence  of  his  enemies,  his 
strength  was  gradually  wearing  away  under  the  uninterrupted 
trials  to  which  he  was  subjected.  Under  these  circumstances 
we  see  him  exhibiting  great  sensibility  to  suffering  and  sor- 
row; a  keen  susceptibility  in  reference  to  the  conduct  and 
feelings  of  others  towards  him;  a  just  appreciation  of  his  dan- 
ger, and  yet  unshaken  confidence  in  his  ultimate  triumph ;  a 
firm  determination  not  to  yield  either  to  opposition  or  to  suf- 
fering, but  to  persevere  in  the  faithful  and  energetic  discharge 
of  the  duty  which  had  brought  on  him  all  his  trials,  and  a  he- 
roic exultation  in  those  very  afflictions  by  which  he  was  so 
sorely  tried.  He  was  sustained  by  the  assurance  that  the  life 
of  Christ  secured  his  life ;  that  if  Jesus  rose,  he  should  rise 
also ;  and  by  the  firm  conviction  that  the  more  he  suffered  for 
the  sake  of  Christ,  or  in  such  a  way  as  to  honour  his  divine 
master,  the  more  glorious  he  would  be  through  all  eternity. 
Suffering,  therefore,  became  to  him  not  merely  endurable,  but 
a  ground  of  exceeding  joy. 


CHAPTER   V. 


The  confidence  expressed  in  the  preceding  chapter  is  justified  by  showing 
that  the  apostle  was  assured  of  a  habitation  in  heaven,  even  if  his  earthly 
tabernacle  should  be  destroyed,  vs.  1-10.  His  object  in  what  he  had 
said  of  himself  was  not  self-coniniendation.  He  laboured  only  lor  the 
good  of  the  church,  impelled  by  the  love  of  Christ,  whose  ambassadi)r 
he  was,  in  exhorting  men  to  be  reconciled  to  God,  vs.  11-21. 

The  state  of  believers  after  death.     Vs.  1-10. 

Paul  did  not  faint  in  the  midst  of  his  sufferings,  because  he 
knew  that  even  if  his  earthly  house  should  be  destroyed,  he 


II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  1.  10^ 

had  a  house  in  heaven — not  like  the  present  perishahle  tabor 
nacle,  but  one  not  made  with  hand?,  and  eternal,  v.  1.  He 
looked  forward  to  the  things  unseen,  because  in  his  ])resent 
tabernacle  he  groaned,  desiring  to  enter  his  heavenly  habita- 
tion. He  longed  to  be  unclothed  that  he  might  be  clothed 
upon  with  his  house  which  is  from  heaven,  vs.  2-4.  This  con- 
fidence he  owed  to  God,  who  had  given  him  the  Holy  Spirit 
as  a  pledge  of  his  salvation,  v.  5.  Having  this  indwelling  of 
the  Spirit  he  was  always  in  good  courage,  knowing  that  as 
soon  as  he  should  be  absent  from  the  body,  he  would  be  pres- 
ent with  the  Lord,  vs.  6-8.  Therefore  his  great  desire  was  to 
please  him,  before  whose  tribunal  he  and  all  other  men  were 
to  appear  to  receive  according  to  their  works,  vs.  9.  10. 

1.  Por  we  know  that  if  our  earthly  house  of  (this) 
tabernacle  were  dissolved,  we  have  a  building  of  God, 
a  house  not  made  with  hands,  eternal  in  the  heavens. 

The  connection  between  this  passage  and  the  preceding 
chapter  is  plain.  Our  light  afflictions,  Paul  had  said,  work 
out  for  us  an  eternal  weight  of  glory,  for  we  know  that  even 
if  our  earthly  house  perishes,  we  have  an  everlasting  habita- 
tion in  heaven.  The  general  sense  also  of  the  wdiole  of  the 
following  paragraph  is  clear.  The  apostle  expresses  the  as- 
surance that  a  blessed  state  of  existence  awaited  him  after 
death.  There  is,  how^ever,  no  little  difficulty  in  determining 
the  precise  meaning  of  the  figurative  language  here  employed. 
Few  passages  in  Paul's  writings  have  awakened  a  deeper  or 
more  general  interest,  because  it  treats  of  the  state  of  the  soul 
after  death;  a  subject  about  which  every  man  feels  the  liveli- 
est concern,  not  only  for  himself,  but  in  behalf  of  those  dear 
to  him.  Where  are  those  who  sleep  in  Jesus  before  the  resur- 
rection ?  What  is  the  condition  of  a  redeemed  soul  when  it 
leaves  the  body  ?  These  are  questions  about  which  no  Chris- 
tian can  be  indifferent.  If  Paul  here  answers  those  inquiries, 
the  passage  must  have  peculiar  value  to  all  the  people  of  God. 
This,  however,  is  the  very  point  about  which  the  greatest  dil- 
ficulty  exists.  There  are  three  view^s  taken  of  the  i)assage ; 
that  is,  three  difierent  answers  are  given  to  the  question, 
What  is  that  building  into  wdiich  the  soul  enters  when  tlie 
present  body  is  dissolved?  1.  The  first  answer  is,  that  the 
house  not  made  with  hands  is  heaven  itself.     2.  That  it  is  the 


108  II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  1. 

resurrection  body.  If  this  be  the  correct  view,  then  the  pas. 
sage  throws  no  light  on  the  state  of  the  soul  between  death 
and  the  resurrection.  It  treats  solely  of  what  is  to  happen 
after  Christ's  second  coining.  3.  The  third  opinion  is,  that 
the  house  into  which  the  soul  enters  at  death  is,  so  to  speak,  an 
intermediate  body ;  that  is,  a  body  prepared  for  it  and  adapt- 
ed to  its  condition  during  the  state  intermediate  between 
death  and  the  resurrection.  This,  however,  is  not  a  scriptu- 
ral doctrine.  Many  philosophers  indeed  teach  that  the  soul 
can  neither  perceive  nor  act  unless  in  connection  with  a  body ; 
nay,  that  an  individual  man  is  nothing  but  a  revelation  of  the 
general  principle  of  humanity  in  connection  with  a  given  cor- 
poreal organism,  as  a  tree  is  the  manifestation  of  the  principle 
of  vegetable  life  through  a  specific  material  organization.  As 
therefore  vegetable  lite  is,  or  exists,  only  in  connection  with 
vegetable  forms,  so  the  soul  exists  only  in  connection  with  a 
body.  Thus  Olshausen  in  his  Commentary,  1  Cor.  15,  42-44, 
says,  VVie  ohne  Leib  keine  Seele,  so  ohne  Leiblichkeit  keine 
Seligkeit ;  Leiblichkeit  und  die  dadurch  bedingte  Personlich- 
keit  ist  das  Ende  der  Werke  Gottes.  "As  without  body 
there  is  no  soul,  so  without  a  corporeal  organization  there  can 
be  no  salvation;  a  corporeal  organization,  as  the  necessary 
condition  of  personality,  is  the  end  of  God-s  work."  Still 
more  explicitly,  when  commenting  on  verses  19  and  20  of  the 
same  chapter,  he  says,  Ein  Fortleben  als  reiner  Geist  ohne 
korperliches  Organ  erkennt  der  Apostle  gar  nicht  als  Moglich- 
keit  an ;  die  Lehre  von  der  Unsterblichkeit  der  Seele  ist  der 
ganzen  Bibel,  ebenso  wie  der  Name,  fremd — und  zwar  mit 
vollem  Recht,  indem  ein  personhches  Bewusstseyn  ini  ge- 
schaifenen  Wesen  die  Schranken  des  Leibes  nothwendig  vor- 
aussetzt.  "The  continued  existence  of  the  soul  as  a  pure 
spirit  without  a  body  is  to  the  apostle  an  impossibility.  The 
Bible  knows  nothing  of  the  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the 
soul ;  the  very  expression  is  strange  to  it.  And  no  wonder, 
for  self-consciousness  in  a  created  being  necessarily  supposes 
the  limitation  of  a  bodily  organization."  Of  course  all  angels 
must  have  bodies,  and  of  course  also  if  the  soul  exists  between 
death  and  the  resurrection  it  must  have  a  body.  Strange  to 
say,  however,  Olshausen,  despite  his  maxim,  "no  body  no 
soul,"  admits  the  existence  of  the  soul  during  the  interval  be- 
tween death  and  the  resurrection,  and  yet  denies  that  it  has 
a  body.  His  utterly  unsatisfactory  attempt  to  reconcile  this 
contradiction  in  his  theory  is,  first,  that  self-consciousness  in 


II.   CORINTHIAKS  5,  1.  109 

departed  spirits  is  very  obscure — a  mere  dreamy  state  of  ex- 
istence ;  and  secondly,  that  it  must  be  assumed  that  a  relation 
continues  between  the  soul  and  the  elements  of  its  decaying 
body  in  the  grave.  This  is  a  perfect  collapse  of  the  theory. 
If  it  involves  either  of  these  consequences,  that  the  soul  is  un^ 
conscious  after  death,  or  that  its  lite  is  in  connection  with  its 
disorganized  body,  and  conditioned  by  that  connection,  then 
it  comes  in  dii-ect  conflict  with  the  Scripture,  and  is  exploded 
as  a  mere  product  of  the  imagination.  If  the  Bible  teaches  or 
assumes  that  a  body  is  necessary  to  the  self-consciousness  of 
the  soul,  or  even  to  its  power  to  perceive  and  to  express,  to 
act  and  to  be  acted  upon,  then  it  would  be  not  only  natural 
but  necessary  to  understand  the  apostle  to  teach  in  this  pas- 
sage that  the  moment  the  soul  leaves  its  present  body  it  en- 
ters into  another.  Then  it  would  follow  either  that  the  only 
resurrection  of  which  the  Scriptures  speak  takes  place  at  the 
moment  of  death,  or  that  there  is  a  body  specially  fitted  for 
the  intermediate  state,  diflfering  both  from  the  one  which  we 
now  have,  and  from  that  which  we  are  to  have  at  the  resur- 
rection. The  former  of  these  suppositions  contradicts  the 
plain  doctrine  of  the  Bible  that  the  resurrection  is  a  future 
event,  to  take  place  at  the  second  advent  of  Christ ;  and  the 
latter  contradicts  this  very  passage,  for  Paul  says  that  the  / 
house  on  which  ^ve  enter  at  death  is  eternal.  Besides,  the 
Bible  knows  nothing  of  any  body  except  the  o-(2»/xa  xj/vxi-kov,  the 
natural  body^  which  we  have  now,  and  the  crw/u-a  Tri^ev/xaTiKoV, 
the  spiritual  hocly^  which  we  are  to  receive  at  the  resurrection. 
We  are  therefore  reduced  to  the  choice  between  the  first  and 
second  of  the  three  interpretations  mentioned  above.  The 
building  of  which  the  apostle  here  speaks  must  be  either  a 
house  in  heaven,  or  the  resurrection  body.  If  the  latter,  then 
Paul  teaches,  not  what  is  to  happen  immediately  after  death, 
but  what  is  to  take  place  at  the  second  commg  of  Christ.  In 
opposition  to  this  view,  and  in  favour  of  the  opinion  that  the 
house  here  mentioned  is  heaven  itself,  it  may  be  argued,  1. 
Heaven  is  often  in  Scripture  compared  to  a  house  in  which 
there  are  many  mansions,  John  14,2;  or  to  a  city. in  which 
there  are  many  houses,  Heb.  11,  10. 14.  13, 14.  Rev.  21,  10  ;  or 
more  generally  to  a  habitation,  Luke  16,  9.  2.  The  figure  in 
this  case  is  peculiarly  appropriate.  The  body  is  compared  to 
a  house  in  which  the  soul  now  dwells,  heaven  is  the  house  into 
which  it  enters  w^hen  this  earthly  house  is  dissolved.  Our 
Lord  told  his  sorrowing  disciples  that  they  should  soon  be 


110  II.  CORINTHIANS  5,  1. 

with  liim,  that  in  his  Father's  house,  whither  he  went,  there 
w^ere  many  mansions,  and  that  he  would  receive  them  unto 
himself.  3.  The  description  here  given  of  the  house  of  which 
the  apostle  speaks  agrees  with  the  descriptions  elsewhere 
given  of  heaven.  It  is  a  building  of  God;  compare  Heb.  11, 
10,  where  heaven  is  said  to  be  a  city  W'hose  builder  and  maker 
is  God.  It  is  not  made  with  hands,  i.  e.  not  of  human  work- 
manship or  belonging  to  the  present  order  of  things.  In  the 
same  sense  the  true  tabernacle  in  heaven  is  said  to  be  "  not 
made  with  hands,"  Heb.  9,  11.  It  is  eternal,  because  the  state 
on  which  the  soul  enters  at  death  is  unchanging.  And  finally, 
this  house  is  said  to  be  "  in  heaven,"  or,  we  are  said  to  have 
it  "  in  heaven."  This  last  clause -is  not  consistent  with  the 
assumption  that  the  house  spoken  of  is  the  resurrection  body. 
That  body  is  not  now  in  heaven  awaiting  our  arrival  there, 
nor  is  it  to  be  brought  down  to  us  from  heaven.  But  the 
mansion  which  Christ  has  gone  to  prepare  for  his  people  is  in 
heaven  ;  and  therefore  the  apostle  in  raising  his  eyes  heaven- 
ward could  appropriately  say,  '  If  this  tabernacle  be  dissolved 
I  have  a  house  in  heaven.'  4.  The  principal  argument  in  fa- 
vour of  this  interpretation  is  that  the  house  spoken  of  is  one 
on  which  the  soul  enters  immediately  after  death.  This  is 
plain  because  Paul  says,  that  if  our  earthly  house  be  dissolved 
we  have,  i.  e.  we  have  at  once,  a  house  in  heaven.  The  whole 
context  requires  this  explanation  to  be  given  to  e;<Ojaev,  we 
have.  The  apostle  is  speaking  of  the  grounds  of  consolation 
in  the  immediate  prospect  of  death.  He  says  in  effect  that 
the  dissolution  of  the  body  does  not  destroy  the  soul  or  de- 
prive it  of  a  home.  His  consolation  was  that  if  unclothed 
he  would  not  be  found  naked.  While  at  home  in  the  body 
he  was  absent  from  the  Lord,  but  as  soon  as  he  was  absent 
from  the  body  he  would  be  present  with  the  Lord.  It  is  so 
obvious  that  the  apostle  is  here  speaking  of  what  takes 
place  at  death,  that  those  who  maintain  that  the  building  re- 
ferred to  is  the  resurrection  body,  propose  various  methods 
of  getting  over  the  difficulty.  Some,  as  Usteri,  assume  that 
Paul,  when  he  wrote  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  be- 
lieved that  the  resurrection  was  not  to  take  place  until  the 
second  advent  of  Christ,  but  changed  his  view  and  here  teaches 
that  it  takes  place  at  death.  That  is,  that  the  soul  when  it 
leaves  the  present  body  is  furnished  with  that  spiritual  body 
which  in  the  former  epistle  he  taught  was  not  to  be  received 
until  Christ  comes  the  second  time.     To  those  who  proceed 


II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  1.  ill 


on  the  assumption  of  the  inspiration  of  Scripture,  this  unnatu- 
ral explanation  needs  no  refutation.  In  his  epistle  to  the 
Philippians,  written  still  later,  he  teaches  the  same  doctrine 
that  we  find  in  First  Corinthians.  He  must,  therefore,  have 
reverted  to  his  former  view.  Paul  was  not  thus  driven  about 
by  every  wind  of  .doctrine.  Even  those  who  deny  his  inspira- 
tion must  admit  his  consistency.  Others  say  that  as  the  apos- 
tle confidently  expected  to  survive  the  second  advent,  he  here 
speaks  of  what  he  anticipated  in  his  own  case.  He  believed 
he  would  not  die,  but  be  changed  at  once  as  described  in 
1  Cor.  15,  51.  52.  But  even  admitting  that  Paul  at  this  time 
did  expect  to  survive  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  that  is  not  the 
expectation  here  expressed.  On  the  contrary,  he  is  speaking 
of  what  would  take  place  (eav)  even  in  case  he  should  die.  If, 
worn  out  by  his  sufferings,  his  earthly  house  should  be  dis- 
solved before  Christ  came,  still  he  knew  he  should  have  a 
house  in  heaven.  Others  again  say  that  the  interval  between 
death  and  the  resurrection  is  not  taken  into  account,  but  that 
the  apostle,  after  the  manner  of  the  proj^hets,  speaks  of  eventf» 
as  chronologically  coincident  which  in  fact  are  separated  by  a 
long  period  of  time.  But  this  does  not  meet  the  difficulty. 
As  the  apostle  is  speaking  of  the  ground  of  consolation  in  thel 
prospect  of  death,  he  must  be  understood  to  refer,  not  to  what  • 
might  be  expected  at  an  indefinite  period  after  that  event,  but 
to  its  immediate  consequence.  He  did  not  glory  in  his  afflic- 
tions because  when  his  earthly  house  should  be  dissolved  he 
w^ould  sink  into  a  state  of  unconsciousness  until  the  resurrec- 
tion ;  but  because  he  would  have  another  and  unspeakably 
better  habitation.  This  is  evident,  because  he  speaks  of  his 
being  absent  from  the  body  as  the  immediate  antecedent  of 
his  being  present  with  the  Lord ;  w^hich  is  only  another  form 
of  saying  he  would  be  clothed  iipon  with  his  house  which  is\ 
from  heaven.  5.  A  fifth  consideration  in  favour  of  the  inter- 
pretation in  question,  is  derived  from  the  analogy  of  Scripture. 
The  Bible  in  other  places  teaches  that  the  souls  of  believers  do 
at  their  death  immediately  pass  into  glory.  Our  Lord  in  re- 
futing the  Sadducees,  who  denied  the  existence  of  spirits, 
said,  "  Have  ye  not  read  that  which  was  spoken  unto  you  by 
God,  saying,  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God  of  Isaac,  and 
the  God  of  Jacob  ?  God  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of 
the  living,"  Matt.  22,  32.  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  there- 
fore are  living,  and  not  in  a  dreamy  state  of  semi-conscious 
Qxistence.     In  the  parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  we 


112  II.  CORINTHIANS  5,  1. 

are  told  that  when  Lazarus  died  he  was  carried  by  angels  into 
Abraham's  bosom,  i.  e.  to  heaven.  On  the  momit  of  trans* 
figuration,  Moses  and  Elias  appeared  talking  with  Christ. 
Our  Lord  said  to  the  dying  thief,  "This  day  shalt  thou  be 
with  me  in  paradise,"  and  paradise,  as  we  learn  from  2  Cor. 
12,  2  and  4,  is  the  third  heaven.  In  Phil.  1,  22-24,  Paul  says 
that  although  he  had  a  desire  to  depart  and  be  with  Christ, 
yet  his  abiding  in  the  flesh  was  more  needful  for  them.  This 
clearly  implies  that  as  soon  as  he  departed  from  the  flesh  he 
expected  to  be  present  with  the  Lord.  This  flows  from  the 
perfection  of  Christ's  work.  As  his  blood  cleanses  from  all 
sin,  there  is  no  process  of  expiation  or  purification  to  be  en- 
dured or  experienced  by  believers  after  death.  And  as  we 
know,  as  our  Lord  says,  that  they  still  live,  they  must  enter 
on  the  blessedness  secured  by  his  merits.  Accordingly  the 
apostle  says  that  the  saints  on  earth  and  the  saints  in  heaven 
form  one  communion.  "  We  are  come  unto  Mount  Zion — and 
unto  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect,"  Heb.  12,  23. 

The  considerations  above  presented  appear  decisive  in  fa- 
vour of  understanding  the  apostle  to  mean  by  the  house  not 
made  with  hands,  a  mansion  in  heaven  into  which  believers 
enter  as  soon  as  their  earthly  tabernacle  is  dissolved.  It  is, 
however,  objected  to  this  view  of  the  passage,  that  as  the 
earthly  house  is  the  present  body,  the  heavenly  house  must 
also  be  a  body.  This,  however,  does  not  follow.  The  com- 
parison is  not  of  one  body  with  another ;  but  of  one  house 
with  another.  We  dwell  now  in  an  earthly  tabernacle ;  after 
death,  we  shall  dwell  in  a  heavenly  house.  This  is  all  that  the 
figure  demands.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  urged  that  in  v.  2 
it  is  said  our  house  is  "  from  heaven,"  and  if  from  heaven  it  is 
not  heaven  itself  But  our  resurrection  body  is  not  from 
heaven  in  the  local  sense.  It  is  from  heaven  only  in  the  gen- 
eral sense  of  being  heavenly,  and  in  this  sense  our  house  is  of 
heaven.  It  is  not  of  the  earth,  does  not  belong  to  the  present 
state  of  existence,  but  to  that  on  which  we  enter  in  heaven. 
Besides,  it  is  not  heaven  considered  as  a  state,  nor  even  as  a 
place,  (in  the  wide  sense  of  the  word  heaven,)  that  is  our 
house,  but  the  mansion  which  the  Lord  has  gone  to  prepare 
lor  his  people  in  heaven.  The  simple  idea  is  that  the  soul. 
w4ien  it  leaves  its  earthly  tabernacle,  will  not  be  lost  in  im- 
mensity, nor  driven  away  houseless  and  homeless,  but  will  find 
a  house  and  home  in  heaven.  This  is  the  consoling  doctrine 
here  tau^rht.     The  soul  oi"  the  believer  docs  not  cease  to  exist 


II.  CORINTHIANS  5,  1.  113 

at  death.  It  does  not  sink  into  a  state  of  unconsciousness. 
It  does  not  go  into  purgatory ;  but,  being  made  perfect  in  ho- 
liness, it  does  immediately  pass  into  glory.  As  soon  as  it  is 
absent  from  the  body,  it  is  present  with  the  Lord.  This  is  all 
that  is  revealed,  and  this  is  enough.  What  Paul  learnt  more 
than  this  when  he  ^as  caught  up  into  the  thii'd  heaven,  he 
was  not  permitted  to  make  known. 

As  Paul  is  speaking  of  himself  in  this  whole  connection, 
when  he  says  ice  knoio^  he  does  not  refer  to  a  knowledge  com- 
mon to  all  men,  nor  to  other  Christians,  but  he  expresses  his 
personal  conviction — I  Jctioio.  That  if^  eav,  if  as  it  may  / 
(not  although).  The  apostle  is  speaking  of  his  afflictions, 
which  were  wearing  away  his  strength ;  and  says,  '  Even  if 
my  sufferings  should  prove  fatal,  and  my  earthly  house 
be  dissolved,  I  have  another  habitation.'  Our  earthly  house 
of  this  tabernacle.,  i.  e.  our  earthly  house  which  is  a  tabernacle, 
6  <jKr]vo%.,  a  frail,  temporary  abode,  as  opposed  to  a  stable,  per- 
manent building.  See  2  Peter  1,  13.  14.  Is  dissolved.,  i.  e. 
its  component  parts  separated  either  by  violence  or  decay,  so 
that  it  falls  in  pieces.  We  have^  i.  e.  I  have,  as  he  is  speaking 
Ibf  himself.  The  present  tense,  ex°/^^?  i^  ^sed  because  the  one 
event  immediately  follows  the  other ;  there  is  no  perceptible 
[interval  between  the  dissolution  of  the  earthly  tabernacle  and 
I  entering  on  the  heavenly  house.  As  soon  as  the  soul  leaves 
ithe  body  it  is  in  heaven.  A  huilding  of  God^  olKoSofxrjv  c/c 
.^eoi),  a  building  from  God,  one  provided  by  him,  and  of  which 
he  is  the  builder  and  maker,  Heb.  11,  10,  and  therefore  is 
said  to  be  7iot  made  with  hands,  i.  e.  not  like  the  buildings 
erected  by  man.  Comp.  Heb.  9,  11  and  Col.  2,  11.  The  lat- 
ter passage  refers  to  the  circumcision  of  the  heart  as  the  im- 
mediate work  of  God ;  it  is  therefore  said  to  be  ax€ipoTroLijTo<;. 
The  soul  therefore  at  death  enters  a  house  whose  builder  is 
God.  This  is  said  to  exalt  to  the  utmost  our  conceptions  of 
its  glory  and  excellence.  Being  made  by  God  it  is  eternal. 
It  is  to  last  forever ;  and  we  are  never  to  leave  it.  We  dwell 
in  our  present  bodies  only  for  a  little  while,  as  in  a  tent ;  but 
heaven  is  an  abode  which,  once  entered,  is  retained  forever. 
The  words  in  the  heavens  may  be  connected  with  house,  in 
the  sense  of  heavenly,  i.  e.  a  celestial  house.  This  construc- 
tion is  assumed  in  our  version  where  the  words  "  eternal  in 
the  heavens  "  are  made  to  qualify  or  describe  the  house  spoken 
of.     The  natural  connection  of  the  words,  however,  is  with 


114  II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  2. 

(exo/xev)  loe  have.     'If  our  earthly  house  be  dissolved,  we  hava 
in  heaven  a  house  of  God,  not  made  Avith  hands,  and  eternal.' 

2.  Por  in  this  we  groan,  earnestly  desiring  to  be 
clothed  upon  with  our  house  which  is  from  heaven. 

This  verse  must,  from  the  force  of  the  connecting  particle 
(yap)  /or,  be  a  confirmation  of  what  jarecedes,  but  whether  <!»f 
vvdiat  is  said  in  v.  1,  or  at  close  of  preceding  chapter,  is  doubt- 
ful. The  words  koI  ydp  may  mean  either /or  also,  or  for  even. 
If  the  former,  this  verse  is  condinate  with  v.  1,  and  assigns  an 
additional  reason  why  the  apostle  looked  at  the  things  unseen 
and  eternal.  He  thus  looked /or  he  knew  he  had  in  heaven  a 
house  not  made  with  hands,  and  because  he  earnestly  desired 
to  enter  that  house.  If  the  latter  explanation  of  the  particles 
be  preferred,  the  sense  is,  '  I  know  I  have  a  house  in  heaven, 
for  even  in  this  I  groan,  desiring  to  be  clothed  with  my  house 
which  is  from  heaven.'  In  this  case  the  argument  would  be, 
'There  is  such  a  house,  for  I  long  for  it.'  This,  however,  is 
hardly  a  scriptural  argument.  Paul's  confidence  in  a  state  of 
blessedness  beyond  the  grave  was  not  founded  on  the  obscure 
aspirations  of  his  nature,  but  on  express  revelation  from  God. 
Rom.  8,  22  is  not  parallel,  for  there  the  groaning  of  the  creation 
is  presented,  not  as  a  proof  of  future  blessedness,  biit  to  show 
that  the  creature  is  subject  to  vanity,  not  loillingly  nor  finally. 
In  this,  i.  e.  in  this  tabernacle,  as  the  word  ax^j/os  is  used  in  v.  1, 
and  also  v.  4.  We  groan  earnestly  desiring,  i.  e.  we  groan  be- 
cause we  desire.  The  groaning  is  the  expression  of  this  long- 
ing after  his  heavenly  home ;  and  not,  as  in  v.  4,  of  suffering 
caused  by  afflictions.  The  kiri  in  cttitto-S^owtcs  is  either  inten- 
sive, earnestly  desiring,  or  it  expresses  the  tendency  of  the  de- 
sire. The  word  and  its  cognates  are  always  used  in  the  New 
Testament  to  expi-ess  strong  desire  or  longing.  What  the 
apostle  thus  longed  for  was,  eTrevSuVao-^at,  to  he  clothed  iipon^ 
i.  e.  to  put  on  over,  as  an  outer  garment.  With  our  house 
vahich  is  from  heaven.  As  the  body  is  familiarly  compared 
sometimes  to  a  house  in  which  the  soul  dwells,  and  sometimes 
to  a  garment  with  which  it  is  clothed,  the  two  figures  are 
here  combined,  and  the  apostle  speaks  of  2:>"tting  on  a  house 
as  though  it  were  a  garment.  Both  are  a  covering  and  a  pro- 
tection. Our  house,  oiKryrryptov,  i,  e.  diceUi  i^j,  more  specific 
than  the  general  term  otKta,  a  building.  Which  is  from 
heaven    i$  ovpavov,  i.  e.  heavenly,  as   distinguished  from  a 


II.  cori:n^thians  5,  2.  115 

dwelling  which  is  ck  yy}?,  of  the  earth.  1  Cor.  15,  47.  It  is  not 
"of  this  building,"  raurT^s  jy]^  KTto-eojs,  Heb.  9,  11.  Those  who 
anderstand  this  whole  passage  to  treat  of  the  change  which  is 
to  take  place  in  those  believers  who  shall  be  alive  Avhen  the 
Lord  comes,  and  which  is  described  in  ]  Cor.  15,  51-54,  lay- 
special  stress  on  this  verse.  They  urge  that  this  house  being 
fro7n  heaven  cannot  be  heaven ;  and  that  the  verb  tTrerSvw, 
meaning  to  put  on  ovei\  evidently  refers  to  the  putting  on  of 
the  new  body,  as  it  were,  over  the  old  one  ;  and  therefore  can 
be  understood  only  of  those  who,  being  in  the  body  when 
Christ  comes,  are  thus  clothed  uijon  without  being  unclothed. 
It  has  already  been  remarked  that  there  is  no  force  in  the  for- 
mer of  these  arguments,  because  the  new  body  is  not  from 
heaven.  It  is  e^  ovpavov  only  in  the  sense  of  being  heavenly, 
and  in  that  sense  the  expression  suits  the  idea  of  a  building  as 
well  as  that  of  a  body.  As  to  the  second  argument,  it  may  be 
admitted,  that  if  the  context  demanded,  or  even  naturally  ad- 
mitted of  our  understanding  "the  house  not  made  with 
hands  "  to  be  the  resurrection  body,  there  would  be  a  pecu- 
liar propriety  in  the  use  of  the  word  iTrevSvaacrSaL,  (to  be 
clothed  uj:>o?i,)  instead  of  the  simple  verb  evSuo-ao-^at,  to  be 
clothed.  But  the  use  of  this  word  is  not  sufficient  to  deter- 
mine the  interpretation  of  the  whole  passage.  1.  Because 
nothing  is  more  common  than  the  use  of  compound  verbs  in 
the  same  sense  as  the  corresponding  simple  ones.  2.  Because 
in  1  Cor.  15,  53.  54,  Paul  uses  the  simple  verb  (ivSva-aa-Sat)  four 
times  to  express  the  very  thing  which  it  is  here  urged  he  must 
refer  to  because  he  uses  the  compound  iirevSvcraa-^aL.  That  is, 
he  uses  the  two  words  m  the  same  sense.  He  makes  no  dif- 
ference between  "putting  on"  and  being  "clothed  icpon.^^ 
We  are  not  required,  therefore,  by  the  use  of  the  latter  ex- 
pression, to  infer  that  the  apostle  speaks  of  the  change  which 
those  who  are  in  the  body  should  experience  at  the  coming  of 
Christ.  This  \dew,  as  remarked  above,  is  out  of  keeping  with 
the  whole  context.  Paul  was  daily  exposed  to  death,  his  out- 
ward man  was  perishing.  His  consolation  was  that  if  his 
earthly  tabernacle  were  dissolved,  he  had  a  better  house  in 
heaven.  He  earnestly  longed  for  that  house  ;  to  be  absent 
from  the  body  and  to  be  present  with  the  Lord.  All  he  says  7 
is  said  on  the  hypothesis  of  his  dying,  and  therefore  he  cannot , 
say  he  earnestly  desired  to  escape  death.  What  he  longed 
for  was,  not  that  he  might  be  alive  when  Christ  came,  and 
thus  escape  the  pains  of  dissolution,  but  that  he  might  quit 


116  II.   CORIIS^THIANS   5,  3. 

his  mud  hovel  and  enter  in  that  house  not  made  with  hands, 
eternal  in  the  heavens. 

3.  If  SO  be  that  being  clothed  we  shall  not  be 
found  naked. 

Few  verses  in  this  epistle  have  been  more  variously  ex- 
plained than  this.  In  the  first  place  the  reading  is  doubtful. 
The  received  text  has  ctye,  which  the  great  majority  of  the 
critical  editions  also  adopt ;  Lachmann,  on  the  authority  of 
the  manuscripts,  B,  D,  E,  F,  G,  reads  eiVcp.  The  latter  [if  so 
Z>e,  provided)  expresses  doubt ;  the  former  {since)  expresses 
certainty.  This  distinction,  however,  is  not  strictly  observed 
in  Paul's  writings.  See  1  Cor.  8,  5.  Gal.  3,  4.  Col.  1,  23.  2 
Thess.  1,6.  A  more  important  diversity  is  that  several  ancient 
manuscripts  and  most  of  the  Fathers  read  iKSvcrdfX€voi  {un- 
clothed) instead  of  evSucra/xevot  {clothed).  The  former  renders 
the  passage  much  plainer.  '  We  earnestly  desire  to  be  clothed 
with  our  house  from  heaven,  since  (or,  even  if)  being  unclothed 
we  shall  not  be  found  naked.'  That  is,  'Although  despoiled 
of  our  earthly  tabernacle  we  shall  not  be  found  houseless.' 
Mill,  Semler  and  Riickert  prefer  this  reading,  but  the  weight 
of  authority  is  in  favour  of  the  received  text.  There  are  three 
general  modes  of  explaining  this  passage  which  have  been 
adopted.  1.  Calvin  among  the  older  commentators,  and  Us- 
teri  and  Olshausen  among  the  moderns,  say  that  the  words 
clothed  and  naked  must  be  understood  to  refer  to  the  moral 
or  spiritual  state  of  the  soul ;  to  its  being  clothed  with  right- 
eousness or  being  destitute  of  that  robe.  Calvin  says  the 
apostle's  design  is  to  limit  the  blessedness  spoken  of  in  the 
preceding  verses  to  the  righteous.  The  wicked  are  to  be  de- 
spoiled of  their  bodies  and  will  appear  naked  before  God ;  but 
believers,  being  clothed  in  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  will 
stand  before  hira  in  the  glorious  vesture  of  immortality. 
There  are  two  garments,  therefore,  he  says,  referred  to  ;  the 
one,  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  received  in  this  life ;  the  oth- 
er, immortal  glory,  received  at  death.  The  former  is  the 
cause  and  necessary  condition  of  the  latter.  Calvin  lays 
special  stress  on  the  Kat,  also,  which  is  inserted  for  the  sake 
of  amplification,  as  though  Paul  had  said,  'A  new  garment  shall 
be  prepared  for  believers  at  death  if  also  (or  already)  in  this 
life  they  were  clothed.'  This  interpretation,  however,  is  evi- 
dently out  of  keeping  with  the  context.     It  is  very  unnatural 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  3.  117 

to  make  the  same  words  have  such  different  meanings  in  the 
same  connection.  In  v.  2  we  are  said  to  be  clothed  with  our 
house  from  heaven ;  in  v.  3  we  are  so  clothed  as  not  to  be 
found  naked,  and  in  v.  4  Paul  speaks  of  being  unclothed.  If 
in  vs.  2  and  4  the  word  refers  to  a  body  or  house,  in  v.  3  it 
cannot  refer  to  the  robe  of  righteousness.  Being  unclothed 
is  evidently  the  opposite  of  being  clothed.  As  the  former  re- 
fers to  laying  aside  the  earthly  tabernacle,  the  latter  must  re- 
fer to  our  being  invested  with  the  house  from  heaven.  Be- 
sides, any  such  distinction  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  or  any  caution  that  the  unrighteous  are  not  to  be 
received  into  heaven,  as  this  interpretation  supposes,  is  for- 
eign to  the  design  of  the  passage.  Paul  is  not  speaking  of 
the  general  destiny  of  men  after  death,  but  of  his  own  per- 
sonal experience  and  conviction.  '  I  know,'  he  says,  '  that  if 
I  die  I  have  a  house  in  heaven,  and  being  clothed  with  that 
house  I  shall  not  be  found  naked.'  There  is  no  room  here  for 
a  warning  to  the  unrighteous.  They  are  not  at  all  brought 
into  view. 

2.  The  second  general  view  of  this  passage  is  founded  on 
the  assumption  that  v.  2  speaks  of  the  change  to  be  effected 
in  those  who  shall  be  alive  when  Christ  comes.  According  to 
Grotius  the  meaning  is,  '  We  shall  be  clothed  upon  (i.  e.  in- 
vested with  a  new  body  over  the  present  one),  if  so  be  that 
day  shall  find  us  clothed  (i.  e.  in  the  body)  and  not  naked 
(i.  e.  bodiless  spirits).'  That  is,  we  shall  experience  the 
change  mentioned  in  v.  2,  provided  we  are  ahve  when  Christ 
comes.  To  this,  however,  it  is  objected,  first,  that  as  the 
event  of  Paul's  being  alive  at  that  time  was  entirely  uncertain, 
and  is  here  so  presented,  the  appropriate  particle  would  be 
ctTTcp  (?y  so  be)  and  not  ei-^c  (^/',  as  is  sure  to  be  the  case) ;  and 
second,  that  this  interpretation  is  inconsistent  with  the  force 
of  the  aorist  participle  ei/Svo-a/xevoc.  The  sense  given  to  the 
passage  would  require  the  perfect  ei'SeSu/xeVoi,  being  then 
clothed.  According  to  Meyer  the  meaning  is,  '  If,  as  is  certain 
to  be  the  case,  we  in  fact  (xat)  shall  be  found  clothed,  and  not 
naked.'  That  is,  '  If  clothed  upon  with  our  house  from  heaven 
(i.  e.  the  new  body)  we  shall  not  be  found  bodiless  when 
Christ  comes.'  This  interpretation  suits  the  words,  but  not 
the  connection.  As  before  remarked,  the  whole  passage  j^ro- 
ceeds  on  the  hypothesis  of  death.  *  If  I  die,'  says  the  apostle, 
'  so  and  so  will  happen.'  This  being  the  case,  he  cannot  be 
understood  to  state  what  would  happen  if  he  did  not  die,  but 


118  II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  4. 

survived  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  Besides,  the  whole  basis  of 
this  interpretation  is  unsound.  Paul  did  not  expect  to  survive 
the  second  advent,  as  is  plain  from  2  Thess.  2,  1-6.  See  the 
comment  on  1  Cor.  15,  51. 

3.  The  third  interpretation  assumes  that  the  apostle  reiers 
not  to  the  spiritual  body  but  to  a  mansion  in  heaven.  In  the 
preceding  verse  he  said  that  he  earnestly  desired  to  be  clothed 
upon  with  his  house  from  heaven,  "  since,"  he  adds,  "  being 
clo!;bc-d,  we  shall  not  be  found  (i.  e.  shall  not  be)  naked."  As 
the  house  from  heaven  is  spoken  of  as  a  garment,  being  house- 
less is  expressed  by  the  word  naked.  This  interpretation 
gives  the  same  translation  of  the  words  as  the  preceding,  but 
a  diiferent.exposition  of  their  meaning ;  and  it  has  the  advan- 
tage of  agreeing  logically  with  the  context  and  with  the  ele- 
vated tone  of  the  whole  passage.  'If  I  die,'  says  Paul,  'I 
know  I  have  a  home  in  heaven,  and  I  earnestly  desire  to  enter 
on  that  heavenly  house,  since  when  driven  from  this  earthly 
tabernacle  I  shall  not  be  houseless  and  homeless.'  According 
to  this  view  the  object  of  his  desire  was  the  glory  and  bless- 
edness of  heaven  ;  according  to  the  other,  it  was  that  he  might 
live  until  Christ  came,  and  thus  escape  the  pain  of  dying. 
This  was  an  object  comparatively  insignificant,  and  utterly 
out  of  keeping  with  the  heroic  sj^irit  which  pervades  the 
whole  context. 


4.  For  we  that  are  in  (this)  tabernacle  do  groan, 
being  burdened  -.  not  for  that  we  would  be  unclothed, 
but  clothed  upon,  that  mortality  might  be  swallowed 
up  of  life. 

This  verse  gives  the  reason  of  the  desire  expressed  in  v.  2. 
'  We  desire  our  house  which  is  from  heaven,  for  in  this  we 
groan,  &c.'  The  words  ot  oi/rc?  mean  ice  who  ar%  not  '  whilst 
we  are,'  which  would  require  the  simple  wre?  without  the  ar- 
ticle. In  this  tahernade.,  eV  tw  aK-qvu^  literall}",  in  the  taberna- 
cle, i.  e.  the  tabernacle  mentioned  in  v.  1,  and  implied  in  v.  2. 
Do  groan  being  burdened^  i.  e.  because  burdened.  The  bur- 
den meant  may  be  the  affliction  by  which  Paul  was  over- 
wliehned ;  or  the  body  itself;  or  the  longing  after  a  better 
world.  As  this  passage  is  intimately  connected  with  the  pre 
ceding  chapter,  in  which  the  apostle  had  spoken  so  freely  of 
his  suiOferings,  and  as  his  experience  in  view  of  death  was  de- 


II.   CORII^rTHIANS   5,  5.  119 

termined  by  those  sufferings,  it  is  perfectly  natural  to  under- 
stand him  to  refer  to  the  burden  of  sorrow.  It  was  because 
he  suffered  so  much  that  he  groaned  to  be  delivered,  i.  e.  to 
be  absent  from  the  body  and  present  with  the  Lord.  N'ot 
that  we  would  he  u7iclothed.  The  words  are  €<^'  w,  which  in 
Rom.  5,  12  mean  propterea  quod,  'because  that;'  but  here 
they  more  naturally  mean  quare,  'wherefore.'  They  intro- 
duce the  reason  of  what  follows,  not  of  what  precedes.  '  On 
which  account,'  i.  e.  because  we  are  thus  burdened  we  desire, 
<fec.  If  €<^*  (S  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  because  that  the  sense  is 
just  the  opposite.  Then  this  clause  states  the  nature  of  the 
burden  under  which  the  apostle  groaned.  'We  groan  he- 
cause  that  we  do  not  wish  to  be  unclothed.'  It  was  then  the 
dread  of  death,  or  the  desire  to  be  glorified  without  the  ne- 
cessity of  dying,  that  was  the  object  of  the  apostle's  intense 
desire.  This  is  altogether  unworthy  of  the  man  and  incon- 
sistent with  the  context.  Paul  says,  '  We  groan  being  bur- 
dened, wherefore,  i.  e.  because  thus  burdened,  we  do  not  wish 
to  die ;  death  is  not  that  for  which  we  long,  but  that  which 
comes  after  death.  It  is  not  mere  exemption  from  the  bur- 
den of  life,  from  its  duties,  its  labours  or  its  sufferings,  which 
is  the  object  of  desire,  but  to  be  in  heaven.'  The  passage  is 
in  its  spirit  and  meaning  altogether  parallel  with  v.  8.  "  Will- 
ing rather  to  be  absent  from  the  body  and  present  with  the 
Lord."  To  he  unclothed  means  to  lay  aside  our  earthly  taber- 
nacle. To  he  clothed  upon  means  to  enter  the  house  not  made 
with  hands.  As  the  earthly  house  is  compared  to  a  garment, 
so  is  the  heavenly  house.  That  mortcdity  {to  ^vt/tov,  that 
which  is  mortal)  may  he  swallowed  up>  of  life,  i.  e.  absorbed 
by  it  so  that  the  one  ceases  to  appear  and  the  other  becomes 
dominant.  Comp.  1  Cor.  15,  53.  54.  This  is  the  elevated  ob- 
ject of  the  apostle's  longing  desire.  It  was  not  death,  not 
annihilation,  nor  mere  exemption  from  suffering ;  but  to  be 
raised  to  that  higher  state  of  existence  in  which  all  that  was 
mortal,  earthly  and  corrupt  about  him  should  be  absorbed  in 
the  life  of  God,  that  divine  and  eternal  life  arising  from  the 
beatific  vision  of  God,  and  consisting  in  perfect  knowledge, 
holiness  and  blessedness. 

5.  Now,  he  that  hath  wrought  us  for  the  selfsame 
thing  (is)  God,  who  also  hath  given  unto  us  the  earnest 
of  the  Spirit. 

6 


120  II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  6. 

It  was  soniotliing  very  heroic  and  grand  for  a  poor,  perse* 
cnted  man  to  stand  thus  erect  in  the  presence  of  his  enemies 
and  in  the  immediate  prospect  of  death,  and  avow  such  supe- 
riority to  all  suffering,  and  such  confidence  of  a  glorious  im- 
mortality. The  apostle,  therefore,  adds  that  neither  the 
elevated  feelings  which  he  expressed,  nor  his  preparation  for 
the  exalted  state  of  existence  which  he  so  confidently  expect- 
ed, was  due  to  himself  He  who  hath  lorought  us  for  the 
selfsame  thing  is  God.  The  words  cis  avro  tovto^  to  this  very 
thing^  naturally  refers  to  what  immediately  precedes,  the 
being  clothed  upon  so  that  mortality  should  be  swallowed  up 
of  life.  For  this  elevated  destiny  God  had  prepared  him ; 
not  created  him,  but  (6  Karepyao-a/xei/os)  made  him  fit  by  giving 
the  requisite  qualifications.  He  was,  as  a  believer,  looking 
forward  with  joyful  expectation  to  his  home  in  heaven,  the 
workmanship  of  God.  Who  also  hath  given  unto  us  the 
earliest  of  the  Spirit.  God  had  not  only  prepared  him  for 
future  glory,  but  had  given  him  the  assurance  of  a  blessed 
immortality,  of  which  the  indw^elling  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
w^as  the  earnest,  i.  e.  a  foretaste  and  pledge.  1,  22.  Eph.  1, 
18. 14.  Rom.  5,  5.  8,  16.  According  to  the  view  given 
above  of  the  context,  the  object  of  the  apostle's  desire  was 
not  the  resurrection,  nor  the  change  which  the  living  be- 
liever is  to  experience  at  Christ's  coming,  but  the  state  of 
glory  immediately  subsequent  to  death.  It  is  therefore  of 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  here  declared  to  be  the  earnest.  Else- 
where, as  in  Rom.  8,  11,  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  is  repre- 
sented as  the  pledge  of  the  future  life  of  the  body,  because  he 
is  the  source  of  that  life  which  the  believer  derives  from 
Christ,  and  w^hich  pertains  to  the  body  as  well  as  to  the  soul. 
Corap.  1  Cor.  6,  19.  AU  therefore  in  whom  the  Spirit  dwells, 
i.  e.  manifests  his  permanent  presence  by  producing  wdthiu 
them  the  Christian  graces,  have  the  pledge  of  immediate  ad- 
mission into  heaven  when  they  die,  and  of  a  glorious  resurrec- 
tion when  the  Lord  comes. 


6.  Therefore  (we  are)  always  confident,  knowing 
that,  whilst  we  are  at  home  in  the  body,  we  are  absent 
from  the  Lord. 

The  grammatical  construction  in  this  and  the  following 
vfrse,  8,  is  interrupted  and  irregular,  which  our  translators 


II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  7.  121 

Iiave  helped  out  by  inserting  the  words  ice  a.re^  thus  turning 
the  participle  ^appovvris  into  a,  verb.  The  unfinished  sentence 
in  V.  6  is  resumed  and  completed  in  v.  8.  Omitting  the  words 
of  resumption  in  v.  8,  the  whole  sentence  stands  thus :  "  Being 
confident  and  knowing  that  whilst  at  home  in  the  body,  we 
are  absent  from  the  Lord,  we  are  desirous  (evSoKov/xcv)  rather 
to  be  absent  from  the  body  and  present  ^\  ith  the  Lord."  This 
verse  is  introduced  as  a  consequence  of  what  precedes.  '  Hav- 
ing the  earnest  of  the  Spirit,  therefore  we  are  confident.' 
This  confidence  is  not  a  mere  temporary  feeling  due  tfo  some 
transient  excitement ;  but  a  permanent  state  of  mind.  Being 
always^  TravTOTc,  on  all  occasions  and  under  all  circumstances, 
even  in  the  midst  of  dangers  and  discouragements  which,  were 
it  not  for  divine  support,  would  produce  despair.  The  ground 
of  the  boldness  and  confidence  expressed  by  the  word  ^appow- 
Tcs  is  not  any  thing  in  the  behever ;  it  is  not  his  natural 
courage,  not  the  strength  of  his  convictions ;  but  it  is  a  state 
of  mind  produced  by  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit,  and  the 
natural  consequence  of  his  presence.  £emg  confident  and 
knowing  ;  both  these  particles  are  grammatically  constructed 
with  the  verb  ice  are  willing^  cvSoKovnev,  in  v.  8,  and  together 
express  the  ground  of  the  apostle's  desire  to  be  absent  from 
the  body.  Knowing  that^  ichilst  we  are  at  home  i?i  the  bodg, 
we  are  absent  from  the  Lord.  The  words  ivSrjfxioi^  to  be  at 
home  (literally,  among  one's  people),  and  iKSrjfx^oj  are  opposed 
to  each  other.  The  figure  is  slighth^  changed  from  that  used 
in  the  preceding  verses.  There  it  was  a  house,  here  a  city,  at 
least  8^/xos,  people,  naturally  sui?gests  that  idea.  Comp.  Phil. 
3,20.    Heb.  11,  13.    13,  14. 

7.  (For  we  walk  by  faith,  not  by  sight.) 

This  is  a  passing,  parenthetical  remark,  intended  as  a  con- 
firmation of  the  preceding  declaration.  '  We  are  absent  from 
the  Lord,  forvi-id  no  w,  in  this  life,  walk  by  faith.'  The  passage 
is  parallel  to  Rom.  8,  24,  "We  are  saved  by  hope  (or  in  hope, 
i.  e.  in  prospect)."  Salvation  is  not  a  present,  but  a  future 
good.  So  here,  presence  mth  the  Lord  is  now  a  matter  of 
faith,  not_of  fruition.  The  condition  of  our  present  state  of 
being  is  that  of  believing.  The  faith  which  is  the  evidence  of 
things  not  seen  and  the  substance  (or  assurance)  of  things 
hoped  for,  is  the  element  in  which  we  hve,  so  long  as  we  are 
not  present  with  those  things.     Being  the  objects  of  faith  they 


122  II.    CORINTHIANS   5,  8. 

are  of  conrso  nhseiit.  The  preposition,  8ta,  may  have  its  ordi- 
nary  force,  "  We  walk  by  means  of  faith  ; "  it  is  by  faith  we 
regulate  our  walk  through  life.  Or  it  may  be  used  here  as  in 
Rom.  8,  25.  Heb.  12,  1,  and  elsewhere,  to  mark  the  attending 
circumstances,  "we  wait  icith  patience,"  "let  us  run  loith 
patience,"  "we  walk  with  faith."  And  not  hy  sight.  The 
word  etSos  does  not  mean  the  sense  of  sight,  but  the  thing 
seen,  form,  appearance,  that  which  is  the  object  of  sight.  In 
Luke  3,  22,  the  Spirit  is  said  to  have  descended  o-w/xaTiKw  ciSet, 
in  a  i)odily  shape ;  in  9,  29  it  is  said  of  our  Lord  that  the 
ctSos  rov  7rpoa(xi7rov  avrov,  the  fashion  of  his  Jhcc  was  changed y 
and  in  John  5,  3*7  our  Lord  tells  the  Jews,  speaking  of  the 
Father,  "Ye  have  never  heard  his  voice  or  seen  his  (cTSos) 
shape."  If  this,  the  proper  signification  of  the  word,  be  re- 
tained, then  etSos  is  the  object  of  faith,  the  form  and  fashion 
of  the  tilings  believed.  Loco  rei  verbo  acqidescimus^  as 
Calvin  expresses  it.  We  are  conversant  with  the  report  of 
heavenly  things,  not  with  the  things  themselves.  We  are 
absent,  not  present  with  them.  In  this  case  8ta  means  icith. 
'  We  are  not  surrounded  with  the  forms  of  things  in  heaven.' 
It  is  no  objection  to  this  interpretation  that  the  preposition 
3ta  has  a  diiferent  force  given  to  it  in  the  second  clause,  from 
that  commonly  given  to  it  in  the  first  clause  of  the  verse. 
'We  walk  by  faith,  and  not  loith^  or  in  presence  o/the  objects 
of  our  faith.'  This  change  in  the  force  of  the  same  preposi- 
tion in  the  same  sentence  is  not  unusual.  See  Heb.  9,  11.  12. 
10,  20.  The  majority  of  commentators,  however,  depart  from 
the  proper  signification  of  the  word  cTSos  and  take  it  in  the 
sense  of  oi//ts,  because  this  agrees  best  with  the  antithesis  to 
7rto-T6s  {faitJi)  and  with  the  force  of  the  preposition.  "  We 
walk  by  faith,  not  by  sight;"  we  believe,  but  do  not  see 
things  which  govern  our  life.  This,  no  doubt,  is  the  idea 
which  the  apostle  intended,  although  not  precisely  the  form 
in  which  he  has  expressed  it. 

8.  We  are  confident,  (I  say,)  and  willing  rather  to 
be  absent  from  the  body,  and  to  be  present  with  the 
Lord. 

The  sentence  begun  and  left  incomplete  in  v.  6  is  here 
resumed  and  carried  out.  ©appoG/xci/  Se,  ice  are  of  good  courage. 
The  particle  hi  may  either  serve  to  indicate  the  resumption  of 
what  he  had  begun  to  say  in  v.  6,  or  be  taken  adversatively  ir 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  9.  123 

reference  to  v.  V.  '  We  walk  by  faith,  not  by  siglit,  neverthe- 
less we  are  not  discouraged.'  AYe  are  not  only  not  despond- 
ing, but  are  so  confident  as  to  prefer  to  be  absent  from  the 
body.  Death  is  not  an  object  of  dread,  but  of  desire.  That 
the  phrase  "  to  be  absent  from  the  body  "  means  to  die  is  evi- 
dent, not  only  from  the  import  of  the  expression  and  from 
the  parallel  passage  in  Phil.  1,  23,  but  also  from  the  whole 
context,  which  treats  of  the  apostle's  experience  in  view  of 
death.  He  was  surrounded  by  dangers;  he  could  scarcely 
bear  up  under  the  load  of  his  sufferings ;  he  was  every  day 
exposed  to  a  violent  death,  which  he  had  escaped  hitherto 
only,  as  it  were,  by  miracle ;  still  he  was  not  cast  down.  He 
sustained  his  courage,  and  even  desired  to  die.  There  can  be 
no  doubt  that  this  verse  is  parallel  with  v.  4,  where  the  apostle 
says  he  desired  to  be  clothed  upon,  i.  e.  w^ith  his  house  which 
is  from  heaven.  The  object  of  desire  is  the  same  in  both. 
It  is  also  plain  that  in  this  verse  it  is  absence  from  the  body 
and  presence  with  the  Lord,  not  the  being  changed  from  cor- 
ruptible to  incorruptible  without  dying,  that  he  earnestly 
longed  for ;  and  therefore  this  verse  shows  that  the  subject 
treated  of  in  the  context  is  the  change  which,  the  believer 
experiences  at  death,  and  not  that  which  those  who  are  alive 
shall  experience  at  Christ's  second  coming.  The  words  IkI^]- 
/xiu)  and  ivS-rjixeoi,  here  used  as  in  v.  6,  are  best  rendered  '  from 
home '  and  '  at  home.'  '  We  would  be  from  home  as  to  the 
body,  and  at  home  with  the  Lord.'  The  Lord  is  of  course 
Christ,  the  supreme  Lord,  who  in  virtue  of  the  fulness  of  the 
Godhead  is  the  rightful  sovereign  and  possessor  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  in  virtue  of  his  dying  for  the  redemption  of  his 
people,  in  a  peculiar  sense  the  sovereign  and  possessor  of  be- 
lievers. The  Christian's  heaven  is  to  be  with  Christ,  for  we 
shall  be  like  him  when  we  see  him  as  he  is.  Into  his  presence 
the  believer  passes  as  soon  as  he  is  absent  from  the  body,  and 
into  his  likeness  the  soul  is  at  death  immediately  transformed ; 
and  when  at  the  resurrection,  the  body  is  made  like  unto  his 
glorious  body,  the  work  of  redemption  is  consummated. 
Awaiting  this  consummation,  it  is  an  inestimable  blessing  to 
be  assured  that  believers,  as  soon  as  they  are  absent  from  the 
body,  are  present  with  the  Lord. 

9.  Wherefore  we  labour,  that,  whether  present  or 
absent,  we  may  be  accepted  of  him. 


124  II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  10. 

Wherefore^  Bcb  Kai,  ivherefore  also,  i.  e.  because  we  desire  to 
be  with  the  Lord.  Longing  after  communion  with  him  pro- 
duces  the  desire  and  secures  the  effort  to  be  found  acceptable 
to  him.  Those  who  have  this  hope  purify  themselves  as  he  is 
pure.  1  John  3,  3.  It  is  impossible  that  those  who  regard  the 
presence  of  Christ,  or  being  with  him,  as  heaven,  should  not 
desire  and  labour  to  be  pleasing  to  him,  by  Uving  in  obedience 
to  his  comm.andments.  We  leibour.  The  word  (fnXoTLfxela-'^aL 
means  more  than  to  labour.  It  signifies  literally,  to  love  hon- 
our, to  be  ambitious ;  and  then  to  make  any  thing  a  point  of 
honour,  or  to  set  one's  honour  in  doing  or  attaining  something. 
So  Paul  says,  he  made  it  a  point  of  honour  not  to  build  on 
another  man's  foundation.  Rom.  15,  20.  And  here  he  intends 
to  say  that  as  ambitious  men  desire  and  strive  after  fame,  so 
Christians  long  and  labour  to  be  acceptable  to  Christ.  Love 
to  him,  the  desire  to  please  him,  and  to  be  pleasing  to  him, 
animates  their  hearts  and  governs  their  lives,  and  makes  them 
do  and  suffer  what  heroes  do  for  glory.  Whether  present  or 
absent.  These  Avords  may  be  variously  explained.  1.  The 
sense  may  be,  '  Whether  present  in  the  body,  or  absent  from 
the  body,''  i.  e.  whether  living  or  dying.  Comp.  Rom.  14,  8, 
"  Whether  we  live,  we  live  unto  the  Lord  ;  or  whether  we 
die,  we  die  unto  the  Lord."  1  Thess.  5,  10,  "Whether  we 
wake  or  sleep,  we  live  together  with  him."  The  connection 
is  then  either  with  ^tXoTt;aou/x€^a,  '  we  strive  Avhether  in  the 
body  or  out  of  the  body;  i.  e.  the  desire  in  question  is  active 
as  well  in  the  living  as  the  dead ; '  or,  as  is  better,  vv'ith  euapecr- 
roL  eipat,  '  vve  Strive  to  be  acceptable  whether  in  the  body  or 
absent  from  it.'  2.  The  sense  may  be,  '  Whether  present  loith 
the  Lord,  or  absent  from  the  Lord.'*  This  is  only  expressing 
the  same  idea  in  a  diffeient  form.  Whether  living  or  dead, 
as  in  Rom.  14,  8.  3.  Meyer  takes  the  words  literally, 
'Whether  at  home  or  abroad.'  But  this  is  utterly  incon- 
sistent with  the  context.  The  objection  to  the  first  interpre- 
tation, tliat  the  desire  to  be  acceptable  to  the  Lord  wiien 
actually  saved,  must  cease,  inasmuch  as  the  object  is  attained, 
is  of  no  force.  The  thing  desired,  ro  ^Tyroi'/xcvov,  as  Chrysostom 
says,  is  that  we  may  be  pleasing  to  Chiist  whether  here  or 
♦here,  whether  in  this  world  or  the  next. 

10.  For  wc  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ ;  that  every  one  may  receive  the  things 


II.  CORINTHIANS  5,  10.  125 

(done)  in  (his)  body,  according  to  that  he  hath  done, 
whether  (it  be)  good  or  bad. 

In  what  precedes  Paul  had  been  speaking  of  himself.  It 
was  his  own  sufferings,  hopes,  and  efforts  which  the  occasion 
called  upon  him  to  exhibit.  In  all  this,  however,  he  spoke  as 
a  Christian,  and  therefore  in  the  name  of  other  Christians. 
In  this  verse  he  expressly  comprehends  others,  and  all  others, 
'  I  strive  to  be  acceptable  to  the  Lord,  for  we  must  all  (I  as 
well  as  all  believers,  and  even  all  men)  must,  &c.'  As  Christ 
is  to  decide  upon  our  eternal  destiny,  it  is  of  infinite  moment 
that  we  should  be  acceptable,  or  well-pleasing,  in  his  sight. 
We  must  all  appear^  (fiavepw^rjvai.  This  means  either  nothing 
more  than  a  judicial  appearance,  as  when  any  one  is  said  to 
appear  in  court  before  a  judge;  or,  as  Bengel  explains  it, 
manifestos  fieri  cum  occultis  nostris,  '  we  must  all  stand  re- 
vealed in  our  true  character  before  the  judgment-seat  of 
Christ.'  1  Cor.  4,  5.  Col.  3,  4.  As  there  can  be  no  disguise, 
no  deception  before  an  omniscient  judge,  Paul  wa§  assiduous 
in  his  efforts  to  be  prepared  to  stand  the  scrutiny  of  an  aU- 
seeing  eye.  The  judgment-seat  of  Christ;  l^rjfjLa^  literally, 
step,  then  a  raised  platform,  or  seat ;  most  frequently  used  of 
the  elevated  seat  on  which  the  Roman  magistrates  sat  to  ad- 
minister justice,  an  object  of  reverence  and  fear  to  all  the 
l^eople.  As  Christ  is  to  be  the  judge,  as  all  men  are  to  appear 
before  him,  as  the  secrets  of  the  heart  are  to  be  the  grounds 
of  judgment,  it  is  obvious  that  the  sacred  writers  believed 
Christ  to  be  a  divine  person,  for  nothing  less  than  omniscience 
could  qualify  any  one  for  the  office  here  ascribed  to  our  Lord. 
That  every  one  'may  receive,  Koy^HQm^  which  in  the  active  form 
means  to  take  up,  in  the  middle,  as  here,  to  take  for  one''s  self 
properly  to  take  or  receive  what  is  one's  due,  or  what  on 
some  ground  one  is  entitled  to.  Matt.  25,  27.  Col.  3,  25. 
2  Pet.  2,  13.  The  punishment  which  men  are  to  receive  will 
be  what  they  have  earned,  and  therefore  what  is  in  justice  due 
to  them.  The  reward  of  the  righteous,  although  a  matter  of 
grace  and  not  of  justice,  yet  being,  agreeably  to  the  tenor  of 
the  covenant  of  grace,  according  to  their  works,  it  is  of  the 
nature  of  a  reward.  The  pay  of  a  faithful  soldier  is  a  matter 
of  debt,  titles  and  estates  are  matters  of  favour.  There  is  no 
inconsistency,  therefore,  in  the  Scriptures  denpng  all  merit  to 
believers,  and  yet  teaching  that  they  shall  be  rewarded  ac- 
cording to  their  works.     We  are  said  to  receive  the  things 


126  II.   CORINTHIAXS  5,  10. 

done  in  the  body,  because  the  matter  is  conceiv^ed  of,  or  is 
here  represented  as  an  investment.  Our  acts  are  treasures 
laid  up  for  the  future,  whether  treasures  of  wrath,  or  treasures 
in  heaven ;  and  these  (/co/xt^o/xerSa)  tee  receive  bach.  The  words 
TO  Sto,  Tov  (TwixaTo-i  maj  mcan  things  {done)  through  or  by  the 
body.  Then  bodily  acts  are  taken  for  acts  of  all  kinds.  Com- 
pare Rom.  8,  13.  Or  the  8ta  may  be  taken  as  in  v.  V,  (accord- 
ing to  one  interpretation  of  that  verse,)  as  indicating  the  at- 
tending circumstance — with  the  body,  i.  e.  while  clothed  with 
the  body.  This  is  the  sense  expressed  in  our  version,  which 
renders  the  clause  "  things  (done)  in  the  body,"  although  8ia 
of  course  does  not  mean  in.  According  to  that  he  hath  done., 
Trpbs  a  eirpa^ev,  indicating  the  rule  according  to  which  the 
retributions  of  the  final  judgments  are  to  be  administered. 
Both  with  regard  to  the  wicked  and  the  righteous,  there  is  to 
be  a  great  distinction  in  the  recomiDense,  which  different  mem- 
bers of  each  class  are  to  receive.  Some  will  be  beaten  with 
few  stripes,  and  some  with  many.  It  will  be  more  tolerable 
in  that  day  for  Tyre  and  Sidon  than  for  those  who  reject  the 
gospel;  and  on  the  other  hand,  those  believers  who  suffer 
most,  will  love  most  and  be  most  blessed.  Whether  good  or 
evil,  i.  e.  whether  he  did  good  or  evil.  Each  shall  receive 
according  to  his  deeds  whether  good  or  bad.  It  is  from  such 
passages  as  this  that  some  American  theologians  have  inferred 
that  the  only  benefit  which  the  believer  receives  from  Christ 
is  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  that  being  pardoned  he  is  dealt 
with  according  to  the  principles  of  justice.  Others,  especially 
in  Germany,  have  drawn  from  the  same  source  the  conclusion 
that  the  doctrine  of  Paul  is  that  the  merit  of  Christ  cleanses 
only  from  the  sins  committed  before  conversion.  If  a  Jew  or 
Gentile  became  a  Christian  his  sins  were  blotted  out,  and  then 
he  was  rewarded  or  punished,  saved  or  lost,  according  to  his 
works.  The  merit  of  Christ  availed  notliing  for  the  pardon 
of  sin  after  conversion.  And  this  again  is  very  much  the 
ancient  doctrine  that  there  is  no  forgiveness  for  post-baptismal 
sins.  The  benefits  of  Christ's  work,  according  to  many  of  the 
ancients,  are  conveyed  to  the  soul  in  baptism,  but  if  once  for- 
feited by  sin  can  never  be  i-eapplied.  This  gloomy  doctrine, 
which  belonged  to  the  transition  period  which  preceded  the 
full  development  of  the  theology  ot  the  Papal  cinirch,  has  been 
revived  by  the  inchoate  Romanists  of  the  present  day.  But 
according  to  the  Scriptures  and  the  doctrine  of  all  Protestant 
churches,  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ   cleanses  from  all  sin, 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  10.  127 

whether  coramitted  before  or  after  baptism  or  conversion. 
It  is  a  fountain  to  which  we  may  daily  come  for  cleansing. 
He  is  a  priest  who  ever  lives  to  make  intercession  for  us,  and 
who  ever  presents  before  God  the  merit  of  his  sacrifice  as  a 
perpetual  offering,  typified  by  the  morning  and  evening  sacri- 
fice under  the  law.  According  to  the  anti-scriptural  views 
mentioned  above,  when  a  man  first  comes  to  Christ  his  sins 
are  forgiven,  and  he  then  commences  anew  under  the  cove- 
nant of  works,  and  stands  in  the  same  relation  to  God  that 
Adam  did  before  the  fall.  The  condition  of  salvation  is  to 
him  as  it  was  to  our  first  parent,  "  Do  this  and  live."  Christ 
henceforth  profits  him  nothing.  But  according  to  the  apostle 
we  are  not  under  the  law,  but  under  grace.  Rom.  6,  14.  On 
the  ground  of  the  one  offering  of  Christ,  by  which  those  who 
believe  are  forever  sanctified,  (i.  e.  atoned  for,)  God  does  not 
impute  to  the  penitent  believer  his  sins  unto  condemnation. 
He  is  not  judged  by  the  law  or  treated  according  to  its  prin- 
ciples, for  then  no  man  could  be  saved.  But  he  is  treated  as 
one  for  all  whose  sins,  past,  present,  and  future,  an  infinite 
satisfaction  has  been  made,  and  who  has  a  ])erpetual  claim  to 
that  satisfaction  so  long  as  he  is  united  to  Christ  by  faith  and 
the  indwelling  of  his  Spirit.  Hence  the  Scriptures  are  filled 
with  exhortations  not  merely  to  the  unconverted,  to  Jews  and 
Pagans,  but  to  baptized  Christians,  to  repent  of  sin  and  to 
beheve  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  that  is,  to  exercise  trust  in 
the  merit  of  his  sacrifice  and  the  prevalence  of  his  intercession 
for  the  pardon  of  their  daily  and  manifold  transgressions  and 
shortcomings.  The  sacrifice  of  Christ  avails  for  the  sins  com- 
mitted from  the  foundation  of  the  world  to  the  final  consum- 
mation. It  affords  a  permanent  and  all-sufiicient  reason  why 
God  can  be  just  and  yet  justify  the  ungodly. 

PauVs  defence  of  himself  against  the  charge  of  self  com- 
mendation.    Vs.  11-21. 

He  declares  that  he  acted  under  a  solemn  sense  of  his 
responsibility  to  God,  v.  11.  This  was  not  said  with  the  view 
of  commending  himself;  but  rather  to  afford  them  the  means 
of  vindicating  his  character,  v.  12.  Whether  his  way  of 
speaking  of  himself  was  extravagant  or  moderate,  sane  or  in- 
sane, his  motive  in  doing  as  he  did  was  a  sincere  regard  to 
the  glory  of  God  and  the  good  of  his  church,  v.  13.  For  th« 
love  of  Christ  constrained  him  to  Uve,  not  for  himself,  but  lor 
6* 


128  II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  11. 

Jiim  who  died  for  him  and  rose  again,  vs,  14.  15.  Acting  un. 
der  the  control  of  this  elevated  principle,  he  was  raised  above 
the  influence  of  external  things.  He  did  not  judge  of  men  by 
their  external  condition.  He  was  a  new  creature  in  virtue  of 
his  union  with  Christ,  vs.  16. 17.  This  great  change  which  he 
had  experienced  was  not  self-w^rought ;  it  was  of  God,  who  is 
the  author  of  the  whole  scheme  of  redemption.  He  is  recon- 
ciled unto  the  w^orld  through  Jesus  Christ,  and  he  has  com- 
missioned his  ministers  to  proclaim  this  great  truth  to  all 
men,  vs.  18. 19.  Therefore,  tl>3  apostle,  as  an  ambassador  of 
God,  exhorted  men  to  accept  of  this  oifer  of  reconciliation,  for 
w^hich  the  most  abundant  j^rovision  had  been  made,  in  that 
God  had  made  Christ  to  be  sin  for  us,  in  order  that  we  might 
be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him,  vs.  20.  21. 

11.  Knowing  therefore  the  terror  of  the  Lord,  we 
persuade  men ;  but  we  are  made  manifest  unto  God ; 
and  I  trust  also  are  made  manifest  in  your  consciences. 

This  verse  is  an  inference  from  what  precedes,  as  is  indi- 
cated by  the  particle  (ow)  therefore.  Paul  had  asserted  his 
earnest  desire  to  be  acceptable  to  the  Lord,  and,  therefore, 
hnowing  the  terror  of  the  Lord^  &c.  In  this  version  of  the 
clause,  Tov  (f)6lSov  rov  Kvptov,  the  genitive  is  taken  as  the  geni- 
tive of  the  subject.  It  is  the  terror  wdiich  belongs  to  the 
Lord,  'Knowing  how  terrible  the  Lord  is.'  But  this  is 
contrary  to  the  constant  use  of  the  phrase.  The  fear  of  the 
Lord  is  that  fear  or  reverence  which  the  Lord  excites,  or  of 
which  he  is  the  object.  Hence  it  so  often  stands  in  Scripture 
for  true  religion.  "  The  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of 
wisdom."  So  in  Acts  9,31,  "Walking  in  the  fear  of  the 
Lord."  Rom.  3,  18,  "The  fear  of  God  is  not  before  their 
eyes;"  and  in  7,  1  of  this  epistle,  "perfecting  holiness  in  the 
fear  of  God."  See  also  Eph.  5,21,  "Submitting  yourselves 
one  to  another  in  the  fear  of  Christ."  In  all  these  cases 
{4>6(3o^)  fear  means  pious  reverence.  There  is  no  reason  for 
departing  from  that  sense  in  this  place.  Knowing,  i.  e.  feel- 
ing or  experiencing,  the  pious  reverence  for  Christ,  the  ear- 
nest desire  to  meet  his  approbation,  asserted  in  the  context, 
the  apostle  acted  under  the  influence  of  that  sentiment,  and 
not  from  selflsh  or  unworthy  motives,  in  all  his  conduct  as  a 
man  and  as  a  minister.     As  the  expression  "  fear  of  the  Lord  " 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  11.  129 

is  so  uniformly  used  to  express  that  reverence  and  submission 
which  are  due  only  to  God,  it  is  clear  from  this  and  analogous 
passages  that  Christ  was  to  the  apostles  the  object  of  the 
religious  affections;  and  that  they  felt  themselves  to  be  re- 
sponsible to  him  for  their  moral  character  and  conduct.  The 
evidence  of  the  divinity  of  the  Lord  is  thus  seen  to  pervade 
the  New  Testament,  and  is  not  confined  to  a  few  isolated 
passages.  Influenced,  says  the  apostle,  by  the  fear  of  the 
Lord,  I  persuade  men.  What  this  means  is  somewhat  doubt- 
ful. The  word  Trct^etv  expresses  the  endeavour  to  convince, 
as  in  Acts  18,  4,  "He  persuaded  the  Jews,"  i.  e.  endeavoured 
to  convince  them  of  the  truth,  and  in  Acts  28,  23,  "  Persuad- 
ing them  concerning  Jesus."  The  apostle  therefore  may  here 
mean  that  he  endeavoured  to  convince  men  of  the  truth  of 
the  gospel,  i.  e.  to  convert  them,  or  bring  them  to  the  obedi- 
ence of  faith.  Or,  he  may  mean  that  he  endeavoured  to  con- 
vince them  of  his  integrity,  or  that  he  was  really  governed  by 
the  fear  of  Christ,  and  was  therefore  sincere  and  honest,  which 
in  Corinth  had  been  so  imjustly  called  in  question.  This  latter 
explanation  is  generally  preferred,  both  because  it  suits  the 
context,  and  because  the  following  clause  seems  to  require 
this  idea.  '  We  seek  to  convince  men  of  our  integrity,  but 
God  we  need  not  convince,  to  him  our  inmost  soul  is  manifest.' 
The  word  (jra'^eu/),  however,  also  signifies  to  conciliate^  to  seek 
to  please,  as  in  Gal.  1,  10,  "Do  we  persuade  (i.  e.  seek  to 
please)  men,  or  God."  Matt.  28,  14.  Acts  12,  20.  1  John  3, 
1 9.  Many  prefer  that  sense  here.  Luther,  in  his  idiomatic 
style,  renders  the  clause,  fahren  wir  schbn  mii  clen  Leuten. 
The  ajDostle  is  supposed  to  refer  to  the  fact  that  he  accommo- 
dated himself  to  all  classes,  and  became  all  things  to  all  men, 
that  he  might  save  some.  1  Cor.  9,  22.  Though  he  thus  acted 
still  he  was  manifest  unto  God ;  i.  e.  God  knew  the  purity  of 
his  motives.  This,  however,  is  an  idea  foreign  to  the  connec- 
tion. His  accommodating  himself  to  others  was  not  the  spe- 
cific objection  made  against  him  by  his  enemies  in  Corinth, 
but,  as  appears  from  the  previous  chapters,  his  "lightness" 
or  instabihty  of  purpose,  and  his  consequent  untrustworthiness 
as  a  man  and  as  a  teacher,  Others  again,  take  ird^^iv  in  a  bad 
tense.  'We  deceive  men,  (as  our  enemies  say,)  but  are  mani- 
fest to  God.'  But  this  is  utterly  incongruous.  How  could 
Paul  say  in  such  a  solemn  connection,  '  I  deceive  men,'  and 
leave  the  saving  clause,  as  my  enemies  say^  to  be  supplied  by 
the  readier.     The  most  natural  interpretation  is  that  given 


130  II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  12. 

above.  '  Under  the  influence  of  the  fear  of  the  Lord,  we  en 
deavour  to  convince  men,  i.  e.  as  he  had  said  in  4,  2,  to  com 
mend  himself  to  every  man's  conscience,  and  whether  success- 
ful in  this  or  not  he  was  at  least  known  to  God.'  Made 
manifest  unto  God^  i.  e.  to  God  I  am  ((^avepos)  apparent^  my 
true  character  is  known.  And  I  trust  also  are  made  raanifesi 
in  your  conscience.  Although  misunderstood  and  defamed 
by  others,  he  trusted  that  the  Corinthian  Christians  as  a  body 
had  an  inward  conviction  of  his  integrity.  The  evidence  of 
his  sincerity  was  his  moral  excellence,  and  therefore  it  ad- 
dressed itself  to  their  consciences.  There  may  be  many  re- 
ports against  a  good  man  which  we  cannot  contradict ;  many 
charges  which  we  cannot  refute ;  and  yet  the  self-evidencing 
light  of  goodness  will  produce  the  conviction  of  his  integrity 
in  the  consciences  even  of  wicked  men,  and  much  more  in  the 
hearts  of  the  good. 

12.  For  we  commend  not  ourselves  again  unto 
you,  but  give  you  occasion  to  glory  on  our  behalf,  that 
ye  may  have  somewhat  to  (answer)  them  which  glory 
in  appearance,  and  not  in  heart. 

His  object  in  thus  speaking  of  himself  was  not  self-praise, 
nor  to  secure  the  confidence  of  the  Corinthians,  which  he  al- 
ready possessed ;  but  to  give  tliem  materials  for  a  vindication 
of  his  character  against  the  aspersions  of  his  enemies.  The 
connection,  as  indicated  by  /or,  is  with  the  preceding  verse, 
of  which  this  is  a  confirmation.  '  I  am  assured  of  your  confi- 
dence, for  the  object  of  my  self-commendation  is  not  to  re- 
commend myself  to  you,  but,  <fcc.'  In  chapter  3,  1,  Paul  had 
had  occa,sion  to  repel  the  charge  of  seli-laudation,  and  hence 
he  says,  he  was  not  about  to  commend  himself  again^  as  some 
said  he  had  before  done.  But  give  you^  literally,  giving 
(StSovres),  and  therefore  a  verb  must  be  supplied,  '  Giving  you 
occasion  we  say  these  things.^  An  occasion  of  glorying  in 
our  behalf  acftopfXYjv  Kavxqfji-o.Tos ;  Kayxq/J-a-  being  taken  in  the 
sense  of  Kux'^qa-'-'^'  ^^^  our  behalf  v-n-ep  rj/xCov,  not  simply  over 
lis,  or  about  us,  but  for  our  benefit.  That  is,  for  our  vindica- 
tion. Some  commentators  suppose  that  tliere  is  something 
ironical  in  this  whole  passage.  As  though  the  apostle  de- 
signed to  taunt  the  Corinthians  with  their  readiness  to  listen 
to  the  false  representations  of  his  opponents,  and  with  the 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  13.  .131 

plea  that  they  needed  not  the  disposition,  but  the  ability  to 
defend  him.  This  vie>v,  however,  is  inconsistent  with  the 
connection  and  with  the  whole  drift  of  the  epistle.  In  the 
immediately  preceding  verse  he  had  expressed  his  assurance 
of  their  confidence  in  his  integrity,  and  throughout  the  epistle 
his  overflowing  love  for  the  faithful  in  Corinth  is  mingled  with 
his  severe  denunciations  of  the  false  teachers  and  their  follow- 
ers. That  ye  may  have.  There  is  no  object  expressed  to  th.e 
verb  {^yy]r^).  ye  may  have.  We  may  supply  (rt)  something., 
and  insert  the  words  to  answer^  as  is  done  by  our  translators; 
or  we  may  borrow  from  the  context  the  word  Kavx-qiJ-ci ;  "  That 
ye  may  have  some  ground  of  koasting.''^  Agamst  those  loho 
glory  in  appearance  and  not  in  heart.  This  is  evidently  dc/- 
scriptive  of  the  false  teachers.  The  words  kv  Trpoa-uuro}^  in  face, 
may,  li'om  the  antithesis  to  iv  KapSta,  i)i  heart,  be  taken,  as  in 
our  version,  for  what  is  external  as  opposed  to  what  is  inwaid. 
Then  the  expression  refers  to  the  fact  that  those  teachers 
gloried  in  their  Hebrew  descent,  in  their  circumcision,  their 
external  religious  privileges,  their  churchmanship,  &c.  It 
was  in  these  things  they  jDlaced  their  confidence,  and  of  them 
they  made  their  boast.  Or  the  words  may  be  taken  literally, 
and  according  to  their  uniform  use  in  other  passages.  Then 
the  expression  describes  the  sanctimoniousness  and  hypocrisy 
of  the  false  teachers.  They  gloried,  says  Meyer,  in  the  holi- 
ness, the  zeal,  and  devotion  which  expressed  themselves  in  the 
face.  They  wished  to  appear  unto  men  to  fast,  to  wear  the 
look  of  sanctity,  while  their  hearts,  as  our  Lord  describes  the 
same  class  of  men,  were  full  of  all  nncleanness.  The  former 
explanation  is.  commonly  adopted,  and  is  probably  the  true 
one,  because  regard  for  externals  is  elsewhere  in  this  epistle 
represented  as  the  prominent  characteristic  of  Paul's  oppo- 
nents in  Corinth.  Their  great  boast  was  that  they  belonged 
to  the  true  church  or  theocracy,  and  that  Paul  and  his  foliow^- 
ers  were  dissenters  and  schismatics. 

13.  For  whether  we  be  beside  ourselves,  (it  is)  to 
God :  or  whether  we  be  sober,  (it  is)  for  your  cause. 

This  verse  again  is  a  confirmation  of  the  preceding.  'You 
have  good  reason  to  glory  on  my  behalf, /or,  &c.'  Whether 
we  be  beside  ourselves.  The  word  l^ia-Tqixi,  to  be  out  of  one'^s 
mbid,  and  other  words  of  like  signification,  are  used  either  in 
their  strict  sense  to  express  insanity  or  madness,  or  in  a  wider 


132  II.  CORINTHIANS  5,  14. 

sense,  to  express  undue  excitement  or  extravagance.  When 
Festus,  Acts  26,  24,  said  to  the  apostle,  "Paul,  thou  art  beside 
thyself;  much  learning  doth  make  thee  mad,"  he  did  not 
mean  that  he  was  really  insane.  And  when  our  Lord's  zeal 
provoked  his  friends  to  say  of  him,  "  He  is  beside  himself," 
Mark  3,  21,  they  certainly  did  not  intend  to  charge  him  with 
insanity.  There  is  therefore  no  necessity  for  taking  the  word 
here  in  its  strict  sense,  and  assuming  that  Paul's  enemies  had 
accused  him  of  being  out  of  his  mind.  It  is  the  more  natural 
to  take  the  word  in  a  wider  sense  here,  because  the  opposite 
term,  o-ox^poi/eco,  {to  he  soher^  or  sa7ie,)  and  its  cognates,  are 
much  more  frequently  used  to.  express  moderation  and  discre- 
tion than  sanity  in  the  strict  sense  of  that  word.  The  apostle 
means  to  say  that  whether  he  was  extravagant  or  moderate, 
whether  he  exceeded  the  bounds  of  discretion,  as  his  enemies 
asserted,  or  whether  he  was  sober  and  discreet,  it  was  not  for 
himself;  he  had  in  view  only  the  glory  of  God  and  the  good 
of  his  church,  and  therefore  the  Corinthians  might  safely 
boast  of  him,  i.  e.  vindicate  him  from  the  aspersions  of  the 
false  teachers.  Whether  the  extravagance  or  insanity  here 
i-eferred  to,  consisted  in  his  sell-commendation,  or  in  his  zeal 
and  devotion,  is  matter  of  dispute.  The  former  is  the  more 
probable,  both  because  in  the  immediate  context  he  had  been 
speaking  of  that  subject,  and  because  hi  chapters  11  and  12 
he  speaks  so  much  at  large  of  his  commending  himself,  al- 
though forced  upon  him,  as  a  kind  of  folly  or  insanity.  In 
those  chapters  the  a(j>poa-vv7]^  [the  icant  of  mind^)  of  which  he 
accuses  himself,  was  self-praise ;  and  the  awcfipoo-virj  (soberness 
or  sanity)  which  he  desired  to  exhibit  was  moderation  in 
speaking  of  himself  and  of  his  labours.  Paul,  therefore,  in 
this  passage,  is  most  naturally  understood  to  mean,  that 
whether  he  praised  himself  or  whether  he  did  not,  whethei 
the  manner  in  which  he  had  spoken  of  himself  be  considered 
as  d(/)pjo-uV7y  or  at^cfipoavvr]^  as  insanity  or  sobriety,  he  spoke  not 
for  himself,  but  for  God  and  his  people. 

14.  For  the  love  of  Christ  constraineth  us;  be- 
cause we  thus  judge,  that  if  one  died  for  all,  then  were 
all  dead. 

'  In  whatever  I  do,'  says  the  apostle,  '  I  act  for  God  and 
bis  church,  for  the  love  of  Christ  constraineth  me.'     The  con- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  14.  133 


nection  is  thus  pLiin.  The  love  of  Christ  here  means  Christ's 
love  for  us,  not  the  love  of  which  he  is  the  object.  This  is 
obvious,  because  the  apostle  goes  on  to  ilhistrate  the  great- 
ness of  Christ's  love  to  us,  and  not  of  our  love  to  him.  Comp. 
Gal.  2,  20,  where  the  same  idea  is  expressed  ]ij  the  words 
"who  loved  me."  See  Rom.  8,  35.  Eph.  3,  19.  \SJonstraineth 
xis^  i.  e.  controls  and  governs  us.  The  word  (ivvix^  means  also 
to  restrain^  a  sense  which  many  adopt  here.  'The  love  of 
Christ  restrains  me  from  acting  for  myself.'  This  is  a  more 
limited  sense,  and  is  not  required  by  the  usage  of  the  word, 
which  is  often  used  to  express  the  idea  of  being  pressed  as  by  a 
crowd,  or  figuratively,  by  calamity  or  sorrow.  There  is  no 
better  version  for  it  in  this  passage  than  that  adopted  by  our 
translators.  '  The  love  of  Christ  constraineth  us.'  It  coerces, 
or  presses,  and  therefore  impels.  It  is  the  governing  influ- 
ence which  controls  the  life^  This  is  a  trait  of  Paul's  experi- 
ence as  a  Christian,  and  is  therefore  common  to  all  Christians. 
It  is  not  benevolence  which  makes  a  man  a  Christian,  for  then 
all  philanthropists  would  be  Christians.  Nor  is  it  mere  piety, 
in  the  sense  of  reverence  for  God,  which  makes  a  man  a 
Christian,  for  then  all  devout  Mussuhnans  and  Jews  would  be 
Christians.  Morality  does  not  make  us  religious,  but  religion 
makes  us  moral.  In  like  manner  benevolence  and  piety  (in 
the  wide  sense)  do  not  make  men  Christians,  but  Christianity 
makes  them  benevolent  and  devout.  A  Christian  is  one  who 
recognizes  Jesus  as  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living*God,  as 
God  manifested  in  the  flesh,  loving  us  and  dying  for  our  re- 
demption;  and  who  is  so  affected  by  a  sense  of  the  love  of 
this  incarnate  God  as  to  be  constrained  to  make  the  will  of 
Christ  the  rule  of  his  obedience,  and  the  glory  of  Christ  the 
great  end  for  which  he  lives.  The  man  who  does  this  per- 
fectly, is  a  perfect  Christian.  The  man  who  does  it  imper- 
fectly, yet  with  the  sincere  desire  to  be 'entirely  devoted  to 
Christ,  is-  a  sincere  Christian.  On  the  other  hand,  the  man 
who  lives  supremely  for  himself,  for  his  family,  for  science,  for 
the  world,  for  mankind,  whatever  else  he  may  be,  is  not  a 
Christian.  Whosoever  loveth  father  or  mother,  son  or 
daughter,  more  than  me,  saith  our  Lord,  is  not  worthy  of 
me,  Matt.  10,  37.  He  that  hateth  not  his  own  life,  cannot  be 
my  disciple,  Luke  14,  26.  The  great  question  is.  What  con- 
stitutes a  Christian  ?  It  is  being  so  constrained  by  a  sense  of 
the  love  of  our  divine  Lord  to  us,  that  we  consecrate  our 
lives  to  him.     Hence  faith  in  his  di\dnity,  faith  in  his  love, 


134  II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  14. 

faith  in  his  having  died  for  us,  is  the  principle  or  source  of  the 
Christian  life.  And  this  is  the  only  form  in  which  true  re- 
ligion  can  now  exist.  That  is,  the  only  true  religion  now 
possible  is  the  worship,  love,  and  service  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ-  It  is  impossible  for  a  man  to  turn  his  back  on  Christ 
and  worship  the  God  of  nature  or  the  God  of  the  Jews. 
Should  a  man  reveal  himself  to  us  first  as  an  acquaintance, 
then  as  a  friend,  and  then  as  a  father,  filial  reverence  and  de- 
votion Avould  be  the  only  form  in  which  sincere  and  true 
regard  for  him  could  exist.  To  deny  him  as  father,  would  be 
to  reject  him  as  a  friend  and  acquaintance.  Since,  therefore, 
the  same  God  who  revealed  himself  first  in  nature,  and  then 
as  the  Jehovah  of  the  Hebrews,  has  revealed  himself  in  the 
flesh,  loving  us  and  dying  for  our  redemption,  to  deny  him  in 
tliis  the  clearest  revelation  of  his  being  and  perfection,  is  to 
deny  him  altogether.  "Whoso  denieth  the  Son,  the  same 
hath  not  the  Father,"  1  John  2,  23.  It  is  the  practical  or  ex- 
perimental form  of  this  great  truth,  which  is  presented  in  this 
passage. 

Because  ice  thus  judge.  This  clause  assigns  the  reason 
why  the  love  of  Christ  exerted  the  constraining  power  re- 
ferred to.  It  was  because  the  apostle  judged  that  the  death 
of  Christ  for  his  people  not  only  placed  them  imder  the 
strongest  obhgation  to  devote  themselves  to  his  service,  but 
it  secured  this  devotion.  They  died  in  him.  Rom.  6,  4.  5. 
As  the  participle  (KptVavras)  is  in  the  aorist,  it  Avould  be  more 
strictly  rendered,  because  ice  judged.  That  is,  '  I  live  for 
Christ,  because  when  I  became  a  Christian  I  regarded  his 
dying  for  me  as  involving  the  obligation  and  necessity  of  my 
livmg  for  him.'  This  w^as  the  aspect  under  which  he  em- 
braced Christianity;  the  judgment  which  he  formed  of  it 
from  the  beginning.  That  if  one  died  for  all.  The  contrast 
presented,  especially  in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  between 
the  priest  and  sacrifices  of  the  old  economy  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  high  priest  and  sacrifice  of  the  gospel  on  the  other, 
is  that  those  were  many,  these  are  one.  The  ancient  j^riests 
could  not  continue  by  reason  of  death.  Our  high  priest,  be- 
ing a  divine  person,  and  therefore  possessed  of  an  endless  life, 
ever  lives  to  save.  The  sacrifices  of  the  law  were  daily  re- 
peated, because  it  was  impossible  that  they  should  take  away 
bin;  Christ  by  the  oflTering  up  of  himself  hath  forever  pei-fect- 
ed  them  that  are  sanctified.  His  blood  cleanses  from  all  sin. 
The  apostle  here  presents  him  as  the  one  priest  and  the  one 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  14.  135 

sacrifice.  [Died  for  all.  'X^\q^  words  are  wep  -rravrcov.  The 
preposition  vTrep,  may  have  the  general  sense,  foi' the  benefit 
of,  in  behalf  of  or  the  stricter  sense,  iii  the  j^lace  of  as  in  v. 
20  of  this  chapter.  Philera.  13.  Eph.  6,  20.  In  many  places 
the  choice  between  these  senses  depends  on  the  context.  In 
all  those  passages  in  which  one  person  is  said  to  die  for  an- 
other, as  Rom^S,  6.  7.  8.  14,  15.  1  Thess.  5,  10.  Heb.  2,  9. 
Comp.  Luke  22,  19.  1  Tim.  2,  6.  Titus  2,  14.  &c.,  &c.,  or  in 
which  the  reference  is  to  a  sacrifice,  the  idea  of  substitution  is 
clearly  expressed.  The  argunient  does  not  rest  on  the  force 
of  the  preposition,  but  on  the  nature  of  the  case.  The  only 
way  in  which  the  death  of  the  victim  benefited  the  ofiferer, 
was  by  substitution.  When,  therefore,  Christ  is  said  to  die 
as  a  sacrifice  for  us,  the  meaning  is,  he  died  in  our  stead.  Ilis 
death  is  taken  in  the  place  of  ours  so  as  to  save  us  from  death. 
That  the  preposition  wep,  in  this  and  similar  passages,  does 
mean  instead  of  is  admitted  by  the  great  body  of  even  Ra- 
tionalistic commentators.  See  De  Wette,  Ruckert,  &c. 
Christ,  it  is  said,  died  for  all,  i.  e.  for  all  the  subjects  of  re- 
demption. This  limitation  is  not  an  arbitrary  one,  but  arises 
of  necessity  out  of  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  is  admitted 
almost  universally.  He  did  not  die  for  all  creatures ;  nor  for 
all  rational  creatures ;  nor  for  all  apostate  rational  creatures. 
The  all  is  of  necessity  limited  by  what  the  Scriptures  teach 
of  the  design  of  his  death.  J  If  his  death  was  merely  didactic, 
intended  to  reveal  and  confirm  some  truth,  then  he  may  be 
said  to  have  died  for  all  benefited  by  that  revelation,  and 
therefore  for  angels  as  well  as  men.  If  designed  to  make  it 
consistent  with  the  interests  of  God's  moral  government  for 
him  to  pardon  the  sins  of  men,  then  he  may  be  said  to  have 
died  equally  for  all  men.  But  if  his  death  was  intended  to 
save  his  people,  then  it  had  a  reference  to  them  which  it  had 
not  to  others.  The  true  design  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  to  be 
learned  from  express  assertions  of  Scripture,  and  from  its 
effects.  It  is  so  obvious  that  the  death  of  Christ  was  designed 
to  save  those  for  whom  it  was  offered,  that  many  of  the  recent 
as  well  as  ancient  commentators  justify  their  explaining  v-rrlp 
TvavToiv  as  meaning  all  men,  by  attributing  to  Paul  the  belief 
that  all  men  are  to  be  saved.  This  is  an  admission  that  the 
all  for  whom  he  died,  are  the  all  who  are  saved  by  his  death. 
One  of  its  effects  is  stated  in  the  following  clause ;  Then  were 
all  dead,  or,  Then  all  died.  The  word  is  a-Kk^avov.  It  is  the 
game  verb,  and  in  the  same  tense.     '  If  one  died,  (dvre^aycyj 


136  II.  CORINTHIANS  5,  14. 

then  all  died,  (aTre^avov).'  The  word  must  have  the  same 
sense  in  both  clauses.  It  cannot  mean  loere  dead,  becaase 
that  is  inconsistent  with  the  force  of  the  aorist.  All^  (literal 
ly,  the  all,  ol  Travres,)  i.  e.  the  all  for  whom  the  one  died.  His 
death  involved,  or  secured  their  death.  This  was  its  design 
and  effect,  and,  therefore,  this  clause  limits  the  extent  of  tlie 
word  all  in  the  preceding  clause.  Christ  died  for  the  all  who 
died  when  he  died.  The  meaning  of  this  expression  has,  how- 
ever, been  variously  explained.  1.  It  is  made  to  mean,  '  Then 
all  died  to  themselves  and  sin.'  His  dying  literally,  secured 
their  dying  figuratively.  2.  Others  say  the  true  meaning  is, 
*  Then  all  ought  to  die.'  But  this  is  not  included  in  the  words. 
The  aorist  does  not  express  obligation.  3.  Chrysostom,  The- 
odoret,  Beza  and  others,  give  the  same  explanation  which  is 
implied  in  our  version,  '  If  one  died  for  all,  then  were  all  sub- 
ject to  death.'  That  is,  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ  proves 
that  those  for  whom  he  died  were  in  a  state  of  condemnation. 
But  this  siiits  neither  the  meaning  of  the  word  nor  the  context. 
It  was  not  to  Paul's  purpose  to  prove  that  men  were  in  a  state 
of  death.  It  was  not  what  they  loere^  but  what  the  death  of 
Christ  caused  them  to  become,  that  he  evidently  intended  to 
express.  4.  The  simple  meaning  of  the  passage  is,  that  the 
death  of  one  was  the  death  of  all.  If  one  died  for  all,  the  all 
died.  The  Scriptures  teach  that  the  relation  between  Christ 
and  his  people  is  analogous  to  that  between  Adam  and  his 
posterity.  Rom.  5,  12-21.  1  Cor.  15,  21.  22.  The  apostasy 
of  Adam  was  the  apostasy  of  all  united  to  him ;  the  work  of 
Christ  was  the  work  of  all  united  to  him.  In  the  one,  all 
died ;  in  the  other,  all  are  made  alive.  As  the  sin  of  Adam 
was  legally  and  effectively  the  sin  of  his  race ;  so  the  death 
of  Christ  was  legally  and  effectively  the  death  of  his  people. 
This  doctrine  underlies  the  whole  scheme  of  redemjition.  It 
is,  so  to  speak,  the  generic  idea  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 
The  apostle  shows  that  man,  ruined  by  the  sin  of  Adam,  is 
restored  by  the  work  of  Christ.  His  people  are  so  united  to 
him  that  his  death  is  their  death,  and  his  life  is  their  life. 
"If  we  be  dead  with  him,  we  shall  also  live  with  him,"  Rom. 
6,  8.  Hence  believers  are  said  to  be  crucified  with  Christ,  to 
rise  with  him,  to  reign  with  him.  Gal.  2,  20.  Eph.  2,  5.  6. 
The  simple  meaning  of  the  words,  "If  one  died  for  all,  then  all 
died,"  therefore  is,  that  Christ's  death  was  the  death  of  his 
peoi)le.  This  as  we  have  seen  is  according  to  the  analogy 
•jf  Scripture ;  and  is  also  entirely  pertinent  to  the  design  of 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  15.  137 

this  passage.  The  apostle  denied  that  he  Uved  for  himself. 
He  asserts  l^iat  he  lived  for  God  and  his  people.  For,  he 
adds,  I  died  in  Christ.  This  is  precisely  the  argument  which 
he  uses  in  Rom.  6.  Shall  we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may 
abound  ?  Far  from  it,  he  says.  How  shall  they  who  have 
died  on  account  of  sin  live  any  longer  therein  ?  If  united  to 
Christ  in  his  death,  we  must  be  united  to  him  in  his  life. 
Another  consideration  in  favour  of  this  interpretation  is  that 
it  comprehends  the  others.  They  are  objectionable,  not  be- 
cause they  are  erroneous,  but  because  they  are  defective. 
Death  on  account  of  sin,  is  death  to  sin.  Dying  with  Christ, 
involves  death  to  self  and  sin  ;  and  of  course  includes  the  ob- 
ligation so  to  die.  The  death  of  Christ  reconciles  us  to  God ; 
and  reconciliation  to  God  secures  a  life  of  devotion  to  his  ser- 
vice. This  is  the  doctrine  set  forth  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  ch.  7. 

15.  And  (that)  he  died  for  all,  that  they  which  live 
should  not  henceforth  live  unto  themselves,  but  unto 
him  which  died  for  them,  and  rose  again. 

This  is  a  continuation  of  the  preceding  sentence,  and  is 
designed  to  express  more  fully  the  judgment  or  conviction 
(KptVavras)  which  the  apostle  had  formed  of  his  relation  to 
Christ.  He  judged  that  the  death  of  Christ  was  the  death  of 
his  people,  and  that  the  design  with  which  he  died  for  them 
was  that  they  might  live  for  hira.  This  idea  is  expressed  in 
various  forms  in  the  word  of  God.  Sometimes  our  Lord  is 
said  to  have  died,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  to  bring  us  near  to 
God,  1  Pet.  3,  18 ;  or,  that  we,  being  dead  to  sins,  should  live 
unto  righteousness,  1  Pet.  2,  26  ;  or,  to  purify  to  himself  a  pe- 
culiar people,  zealous  of  good  works,  Titus  2,  14.  In  Rom. 
14,  9,  the  mode  of  statement  is  exactly  parallel  to  the  passage 
before  us.  "  To  this  end  Christ  both  died  and  rose  that  he 
might  be  the  Lord  both  of  the  dead  and  living."  To  say 
that  Christ  died  that  he  might  be  the  Lord  of  his  people,  is  to 
say  that  he  died  that  they  might  be  his  servants,  i.  e.  belong 
to  him  and  be  devoted  to  him.  The  proximate  design  and 
effect  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  the  expiation  of  sin  and  recon- 
ciliation with  God,  and  the  design  and  effect  of  reconcihation 
with  God  are  devotion  to  his  service.  Hence  the  death  of 
Christ  is  sometimes  presented  in  reference  to  its  proximate, 


138  II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  18. 

sometimes  in  reference  to  its  ultimate  design ;  i.  e.  sometimes 
he  is  said  to  have  died  to  make  a  propitiation  for  sin,  and 
sometimes,  to  bring  us  near  to  God.  Here  it  is  the  latter. 
He  died  that  they  ichich  live  should  not  henceforth  live  iinta 
themselves.  "  Those  wlio  live,"  ol  Iwvre^,  not,  those  who  sur 
vive  his  death;  nor,  those  who  are  spiritually  living ;  nor 
the  happy  or  blessed^  but,  those  who,  although  they  died  in 
Christ,  are  still  living.  Their  death  in  him  is  not  inconsistent 
with  their  being  alive,  for  they  died  in  one  sense  and  they 
live  in  another.  Those  for  whom  Christ  died,  and  on  whom 
his  death  takes  effect,  thenceforth,  i.  e.  from  the  time  they 
apprehend  their  relation  to  him,  and  feel  the  power  of  his  vi- 
carious death,  do  not  live  unto  themselves.,  i.  e.  self  is  not  the 
object  for  which  they  live.  This  is  the  negative  description 
of  the  Chi-istian.  He  is  a  man  who  does  not  live  unto  himself. 
This  is  what  he  is  not.  The  positive  description  is  given  in 
the  next  clause.  He  lives /b?'  him  who  died  for  him  and  rose 
again.  This  presents  both  the  object  and  the  ground  of  the 
Christian's  devotion.  He  lives  for  him  who  died  for  him,  and 
because  he  died  for  him.  He  is  not  a  Christian  w^ho  is  simply 
unselfish,  i.  e.  who  lives  for  some  object  out  of  himself.  He 
only  is  a  Christian  w4io  lives  for  Christ.  Many  persons  think 
they  can  be  Christians  on  easier  terms  than  these.  They 
think  it  is  enough  to  trust  in  Christ  while  they  do  not  live  for 
him.  But  the  Bible  teaches  us  that  if  we  are  partakers  of 
Christ's  death,  we  are  also  partakers  of  his  life ;  if  we  have 
any  such  appreciation  of  his  love  in  dying  for  us  as  to  lead  U3 
to  confide  in  the  merit  of  his  death,  we  shall  be  constrained  to 
consecrate  our  lives  to  his  service.  And  this  is  the  only  evi- 
dence of  the  genuineness  of  our  faith.  And  rose  again.  We 
do  not  serve  a  dead  Saviour.  The  resurrection  of  Christ  is 
as  essential  to  redemption  as  his  death.  He  died  for  our  sins 
and  rose  again  for  our  justification.  And  it  is  to  this  risen 
Saviour,  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  to  whom  all  power 
in  heaven  and  earth  has  been  committed,  and  who  ever  lives 
to  make  intercession  for  us,  who  is  the  object  of  the  supreme 
love  of  the  believer,  to  whose  service  and  glory  the  Christian 
consecrates  his  life. 

16.  Wherefore  henceforth  know  we  no  man  after 
the  flesh :  yea,  though  we  have  known  Christ  after  the 
flesh,  yet  now  henceforth  know  we  (him)  no  more. 


II.    CORINTHIANS   5,  16.  139 

This  is  an  inference,  (oia-rc.  50  that).  'Such  is  the  nature 
of  the  change  which  I  have  experienced  through  the  appre- 
hension of  the  love  of  Christ,  as  just  described,  that  I  no 
longer  see  or  judge  of  things  according  to  the  flesh.'  The  ice 
refers  primarily  to  the  apostle  himself,  as  he  is  still  engaged 
in  self-vindication.  He  was  acting  from  pure  motives,  he  says, 
for  a  sense  of  the  love  of  Christ  constrained  him  not  to  live  for 
himself  but  for  Christ,  and  therefore  he  no  longer  judged  of 
persons  or  things  as  he  had  been  accustomed  to  do.  Paul's  ex- 
perience, however,  was  his  experience  as  a  Christian,  and  there- 
fore not  peculiar  to  himself.  It  is  true  of  all  Christians  that 
they  do  not  know  (i.  e.  estimate,  judge,  feel  in  reference  to) 
any  man  according  to  the  flesh.  This  may  moan,  that  the 
judgment  is  not  regulated  or  determined  by  a  regard  to 
what  is  external.  It  is  not  a  man's  outward  circumstances, 
his  birth,  his  station,  his  being  rich  or  poor,  Jew  or  Gentile, 
that  determines  our  estimate  of  him.  Or  the  meaning  may 
be,  that  the  judgment  was  not  determined  by  carnal  or  selfish 
considerations.  Paul  was  not  led  to  approve  or  disapprove, 
love  or  hate  any  man  from  selfish  or  corrupt  motives.  This 
latter  view  would  suit  the  context,  for  the  apostle  had  just 
said  that  he  hved  not  for  himself  but  for  Christ,  and  therefore 
his  judgments  of  men  were  not  determined  by  a  regard  to 
himself.  It  is  also  consistent  with  the  usage  of  the  word ;  for 
cro/j^jneans  co*'rwjc>'  nature^  as  well  as  what  is  outward.  The 
following  part  of  the  verse,  however,  is  decisively  in  favour  of 
the  former  interpretation.  Comp.  11,  18.  John  8,  15.  Phil. 
3,  4.  Paul  evidently  contrasts  himself  as  he  now  was  {awo  tov 
vvv)  with  what  he  was  before  his  conversion ;  and  also  himself 
with  his  Judaizing  opponents  in  Corinth.  Yea,  though  we 
haiJt  known  Christ  after  the  flesh.  The  w^ords  d  hi  Kat,  but 
even  ifl  are  concessive.  Paid  admits  that  he  had  once  done 
what  he  here  condemns.  He  had  known  or  estimated  Christ 
cifterthe  flesh.  Of  course  this  does  not  mean  that  he  had 
known  Christ  while  in  the  flesh,  as  Olshausen  supposes,  be- 
cause that  would  be  saying  nothing  to  the  purpose,  and  be- 
cause there  is  no  evidence  of  Paul's  ever  having  seen  our 
Lord  before  his  resurrection.  Olshausen's  idea  is,  that  as  he 
formerly  regarded  men  as  men,  but  now  only  as  Christians, 
i.  e.  had  reference  only  to  what  was  spiritual,  so  also  he  no 
longer  thinks  of  Christ  as  he  once  knew  him  on  earth,  but  as 
he  is  glorified  in  heaven.  But  this  does  not  suit  the  connec- 
tion nor  the  facts  of  the  case.     The  words  Kara  crapKa  must 


140  II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  17. 

have  the  same  sense  in  both  parts  of  the  verse ;  and  in  the 
former  they  do  not  designate  the  life  before  conversion,  and 
therefore  M'hen  spoken  in  reference  to  Christ  are  not  to  be 
understood  of  his  earthly  as  opposed  to  his  heavenly  life. 
Paul  had  known  Christ  after  the  flesh  in  the  sense  of  estimat- 
ing him  entirely  according  to  the  outward  appearance  of 
things.  Christ  does  not  here  mean  the  Messiah,  but  is  the 
historical  designation  of  our  Lord  as  an  individual.  Paul  had 
despised  and  hated  him  because  he  judged  him  only  according 
to  his  outward  appearance  as  a  poor  suffering  man,  yet  claim- 
ing to  be  the  Christ  the  Son  of  the  living  God.  His  Jewish 
notions  of  what  the  Messiah  was  to  be  led  him  to  regard  with 
indignation  the  claims  of  Jesus  to  be  the  Christ.  Yet  now 
henceforth  know  ice  {him)  no  more.  The  order  of  the  words 
in  the  original  shows  that  the  words  Kara  crdpKa  are  to  be  con- 
nected wdth  the  verb  and  not  with  its  object ;  d  8e  koL  eyvwKa- 
fxev  Kara  crdpKa  Xpta-Tov.  That  is,  w^e  no  longer  judge  after  the 
Jlesh  concerning  Christ ;  we  no  longer  estimate  him  according 
to  appearance,  but  know  him  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  wdio  loved 
us  and  gave  himself  for  us.     Gal.  2,  20. 

17.  Therefore,  if  any  man  (be)  in  Christ,  (he  is)  a 
new  creature  :  old  things  are  passed  away ;  behold,  all 
things  are  become  new. 

A  further  inference  from  what  precedes.  What  was  true 
in  Paul's  case,  must  be  true  in  all  analogous  cases.  If  the 
revelation  of  Christ,  the  apprehension  of  his  glory  and  love, 
had  wrought  such  a  change  in  him,  the  same  illumination 
must  produce  a  like  change  in  others.  He  therefore  says.  If 
any  man  he  in  Christ  he  is  a  new  creature.  The  proposition 
is  general ;  it  applies  to  every  man.  To  be  in  Christ  is  the 
common  scriptural  phrase  to  express  the  saving  connection  or 
union  betw^een  him  and  his  people.  They  are  in  him  by  cove- 
nant, as  all  men  were  in  Adam ;  they  are  in  him  as  members 
of  his  body,  through  the  indwelling  of  his  Spirit ;  and  they 
are  in  him  by  faith,  which  lays  hold  of  and  appropriates  him 
as  the  life  and  portion  of  the  soul.  Rom,  8,  1.  9.  Gal.  5,  6,  <fec. 
This  union  is  transforming.  It  imparts  a  new  life.  It  effects 
a  new  creation.  This  expression  indicates  not  only  the  great- 
ness and  radical  nature  of  the  change  effected,  but  also  its 
divine  origin.  It  is  a  divine  work,  i.  e.  one  due  to  the  mighty 
power  of  God.     It  is  therefore  called  a  creation,  the  com 


II.   CORINTHIAN^S  5,  17.  141 

mencement  of  a  new  state  of  being.  Eph.  1,  19.  In  Gal.  6, 15. 
Rom.  8,  9,  and  elsewhere,  the  same  effects  are  ascribed  to 
union  with  Christ.  If  we  are  united  to  him  so  as  to  be  inter- 
ested in  the  merits  of  his  death,  we  must  also  be  partakers  of 
his  life.  This  is  the  foundation  on  which  the  apostle  builds 
his  whole  doctrine  of  sanctification  as  developed  in  the  sixth 
and  seventh  chapter  of  his  epistle  to  the  Romans.  The  word 
Katvob,  new^  ttnhnpaired^  xincontaminated^  is  an  epithet  of  ex- 
cellence ;  a  new  song,  a  new  name,  new  heavens,  new  earth, 
the  new  Jerusalem,  the  new  man,  a  new  creature,  are  scrip- 
tural expressions  which  will  occur  to  every  reader.  In  the 
margin  of  the  English  Bible  this  clause  is  rendered,  Let  him 
he  a  new  creature.  This  is  in  accordance  with  Calvin's  view 
of  the  passage.  "If  any  man  would  be  in  Christ,  i.  e.  if  he 
would  be  of  consequence  in  Christ's  kingdom,  let  him  become 
a  new  creature."  He  supposes  that  the  apostle  refers  to  the 
ambition  of  the  false  teachers,  whom  he  tells  that  if  they  wish 
to  attain  the  influence  to  which  they  aspire,  they  must  like 
him  be  entirely  changed  from  selfishness  to  devotion  to  Christ. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  words  to  require  this,  and  every  thing 
in  the  context  is  opposed  to  it.  The  apostle  is  detailing  his 
own  experience,  unfolding  the  principles  on  which  he  acted, 
and  showing  the  effect  which  the  apprehension  of  the  love  of 
Christ  had  on  him  and  must  have  on  others.  If  any  man  is  in 
Christ  he  is  thereby  made  a  new  creature.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, Is.  43, 18.  19.  65,  17,  the  effects  to  be  produced  by  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah  are  described  as  a  making  all  things 
new.  The  final  consummation  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom  in 
heaven  is  described.  Rev.  21,  5,  in  the  same  terms.  "He  that 
sat  upon  the  throne  said,  Behold,  I  make  all  things  new." 
The  inward  spiritual  change  in  every  believer  is  set  forth  in 
the  same  words,  because  it  is  the  type  and  necessary  condition 
of  this  great  cosmical  change.  What  would  avail  any  con- 
ceivable change  in  things  external,  if  the  heart  remained  a 
cage  of  unclean  birds  ?  The  apostle  therefore  says  that  if  any 
man  is  in  Christ  he  experiences  a  change  analogous  to  that 
predicted  by  the  prophets,  and  like  to  that  which  we  still  an- 
ticipate when  earth  shall  become  heaven.  "  Old  things  are 
passed  away;  behold,  all  things  have  become  new."  Old 
opinions,  views,  plans,  desires,  principles  and  affections  are 
passed  away ;  new  views  of  truth,  new  principles,  new  appre- 
hensions of  the  destiny  of  man,  and  new  feelings  and  purposes 
fill  and  govern  the  soul. 


142  II.    CORINTHIANS   5,  18. 

18.  And  all  things  (are)  of  God,  who  hath  recon- 
ciled us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  hath  given  to 
us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation. 

All  things  are  of  God ;  this  is  not  spoken  of  the  universe 
as  proceeding  from  God  as  its  author  ;  nor  does  it  refer  to 
the  providential  agency  of  God,  by  which  all  events  are  con- 
trolled. The  meaning  of  to.  8e  iravra  here  is,  hut  all  is  of  God^ 
i.  e.  the  entire  change  of  which  he  had  been  speaking.  The 
new  creation  experienced  by  those  who  are  in  Christ  is  Ik  tov 
©€ou,  is  out  of  God,  proceeds  from  him  as  its  efficient  cause. 
It  is  his  work.  God  eifects  this  great  moral  and  spiritual 
revolution  hi/  reconciling  us  unto  himself  The  word  us  is 
not  to  be  limited  to  the  apostle,  first,  because  the  reconcihation 
spoken  of  is  not  peculiar  to  him ;  and  secondly,  because  the 
change  or  new  creation  effected  by  this  reconciliation  belongs 
to  all  who  are  in  Christ.  Us,  therefore,  must  include  all  who 
are  in  Christ.  The  objection  to  this  interpretation  that  to  vs 
in  the  next  clause  of  the  verse  must  refer  to  the  apostle,  is 
not  a  serious  one,  because  the  passage  is  perfectly  perspicuous 
even  supposing  T7/^as,  us,  to  refer  to  all  believers,  and  vy/xu',  to 
us,  to  the  apostle  himself  To  reconcile  is  to  remove  enmity 
between  parties  at  variance  with  each  other.  In  this  case 
God  is  the  reconciler.  Man  never  makes  reconciliation.  It 
is  what  he  experiences  or  embraces,  not  what  he  does.  The 
enmity  between  God  and  man,  the  barrier  which  separated 
them,  is  removed  by  the  act  of  God.  This  is  plain,  1.  Because 
it  is  said  to  be  effected  by  Jesus  Christ,  that  is,  by  his  death. 
The  death  of  Christ,  however,  is  always  represented  as  recon- 
ciling us  to  God  as  a  sacrifice ;  the  design  and  nature  of  a 
sacrifice  are  to  proj^itiate  and  not  to  reform.  2.  In  the  paral- 
lel passage,  Rotn.  5,  9.  10,  being  "reconciled  by  the  death  of 
the  Son,"  is  interchanged  as  equivalent  with  "  being  justified 
by  his  blood,"  which  proves  that  the  reconciliation  intended 
consists  in  the  satisfaction  of  the  divine  justice  by  the  sacrifice 
of  Christ.  3.  In  this  case  our  reconciliation  to  God  is  made 
the  source  and  cause  of  our  new  creation,  i.  e.  of  our  regene- 
ration and  holiness.  God's  reconciliation  to  us  must  i)recede 
our  reconciliation  to  him.  This,  as  remarked  above,  is  the 
great  doctrine  of  the  Bible.  So  long  as  we  are  under  the 
wrath  and  curse  of  God,  due  to  us  for  sm,  we  are  aliens  and 
enemies,  cut  off  from  his  favour  and  fellowship,  which  are  the 
life  of  the  soul.     Therefore  until  God's  wrath  and  curse  are 


II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  19.  143 

removed,  there  is  no  possibility  of  holiness  and  love.  It  is 
vain  to  attempt  to  secure  the  favour  of  God  by  being  holy;^ 
we  must  enjoy  his  favour  before  we  can  be  holy.  See  Rom. 
V,  56.  As  the  apostle  here  ascribes  our  holiness  to  our  being 
reconciled  to  God,  he  must  of  necessity  refer  to  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  God  to  us ;  i.  e.  to  his  being  propitious,  ready  to  re- 
ceive us  into  his  fivour  and  to  manifest  to  us  hi^  love.  And 
hath  given  to  tis,  i.  e.  to  the  apostle  and  to  other  preachers  of 
the  gospel,  for  the  thing  given  was  not  somethin^^  pecuhar  to 
the  apostles  but  common  to  all  preachers,  viz.,  L\e  7ni7iistry 
of  reconciliation^  i.  e.  the  office  and  duty  of  announcing  this 
reconciliation.  It  is  therefore  the  peculiar  duty  or  special 
design  of  the  ministry  to  proclaim  to  men  that  God,  justly 
offended  by  their  sins,  can  be  just  and  yet  justify  those  who 
come  to  him  by  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  the  emyye'Aiov,  or  glad 
tidings,  w^hich  our  blessed  Lord  has  commissioned  his  disciples 
to  announce  to  every  creature  under  heaven. 

19.  To  wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the 
world  unto  himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto 
them ;  and  hath  committed  unto  us  the  word  of  recon- 
cihation. 

This  verse  is  an  explanation  and  confirmation  of  what  pre- 
cedes. According  to  our  version,  and  to  the  common  inter- 
pretation, it  is  an  explanation  of  the  last  clause  of  v.  18,  i.  e. 
of  the  "  reconciliation  "  there  spoken  of.  '  He  hath  given  to 
us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation — ^because  God  was  reconciling 
the  world  unto  himself,  &c.'  To  this  it  is  objected  by  Meyer 
and  others,  that  the  position  of  the  word  -^eds  {God)  requires 
the  emphasis  to  be  thrown  on  that  word ;  and  secondly,  that 
the  two  following  clauses  must,  in  that  case,  explain  the  mode 
)f  that  reconciliation.  Paul  would  then  say,  '  God  was  recon- 
ciling the  world  unto  himself,  having  committed  to  us  the 
word  of  reconciliation.'  But  our  reconciliation  to  God  is  not 
the  ministry  of  reconciliation.  The  former  does  not  consist 
in  the  latter ;  nor  is  the  tirst  the  consequence  of  the  second. 
This  verse  therefore  is  referred  to  the  first  clause  of  v.  18. 
'  All  things  are  of  God,  &c.,  because  God  was  reconciling,  &c.» 
The  words  tbs  ori,  rendered  to  wit^  mean  here  seeing  that,  or 
because.  They  are  equivalent  to  the  simple  on.  The  expres- 
sion is  explained  either  as  a  pleonasm,  or  as  the  mixture  of 
t\^'0  constructions,  ws  ^eov  6vTo<i  and  on  ^cds  eort. 


lU  II.    CORIXTIIIANS   5,  19. 

The  principal  difiorence  among  interpreters  in  the  explana- 
tion of  this  verse  relates  to  the  question  whether  [r/v)  was  is 
to  be  referred  to  {iv  Xpca-rw)  in  Christ,  or  to  (KaTaAAacra-oov) 
reconciling.  Our  version  favours  the  former  mode  of  con- 
struction, which  is  adopted  both  by  Luther  and  Calvin.  The 
sense  then  is,  '  God  was  in  Christ,  when  he  reconciled  the 
world  unto  himself;'  or,  as  Luther  renders  it,  "God  was  in 
Christ,  and  reconciled  the  world  with  himself,  and  imputed 
not  to  them  their  sins,  &c."  This  breaks  up  the  verse  into 
distinct  propositions,  turning  all  the  participles  into  verbs. 
Calvin  says  that  by  God  w^e  are  not  to  understand  the  divine 
nature,  or  "the  fulness  of  the  Godhead,"  but  God  the  Father; 
and  refers  to  John  10,  38,  "The  father  is  in  me,"  as  a  parallel 
expression.  He  thinks  the  design  of  the  apostle  is  to  assure 
believers  that  in  having  Christ,  they  have  the  Father  also ; 
that  Christ  is  the  true  Immanuel,  whose  advent  is  the  ap- 
proximation of  God  to  man.  But  all  this  is  foreign  to  the 
context.  What  follows  is  no  proof  that  "  God  was  in  Christ," 
but  it  is  a  proof  of  his  being  engaged,  so  to  speak,  in  the 
great  work  of  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself.  Most  inter- 
preters, therefore,  adopt  the  other  construction,  'God  was 
reconciling  the  world  unto  himself  in  Christ.'  As  in  v.  18  it 
is  said  that  God  reconciled  us  to  himself  3ta  Xptorov  {through 
Christ),  here  it  is  said  to  be  Iv  Xpto-Tw  {^in  Christ).  The  im- 
perfect r]v  KaTaXXdaa-iov,  was  reconciling,  expresses  either  con- 
temporary  or  continuous  action.  The  sense  may  be,  '  God 
was,  when  Christ  died,  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself; ' 
that  was  what  he  was  doing  and  designed  to  do  when  he  gave 
his  Son  up  for  us  all.  So  Meyer  and  others.  Or,  the  refer- 
ence is  to  what  follows  ;  '  He  reconciled  the  world,  not  imput- 
ing unto  men  their  sins,  &c.'  That  is,  '  While  not  imputing, 
&c.'  But  this  is  impossible,  because  the  next  clause,  '  and 
given  to  us  the  word  of  reconciliation,'  cannot  express  what 
was  contemporaneous  with  the  reconciling.  Others  say  that 
the  itnperfect  is  used  for  the  aorist.  The  first  explanation  is 
to  be  preferred.  God  was  reco7iciling  the  world  unto  himself, 
means  God  was  making  atonement  tor  the  sins  of  the  world. 
He  set  Christ  forth  as  a  propitiation.  Theodoret  explains  rjv 
KaTaWda-a-oiv  by  KaraXAayas  iiroL^a-aTO.  By  the  world  (KO(r/AOS, 
witliout  the  article)  is  meant  man,  matikind.  The  reference 
or  statement  is  perfectly  indefinite  ;  it  merely  indicates  the 
class  of  beings  towards  whom  God  was  manifesting  himself  aa 
propitious.     In  the  same  sense  our  Lord  is  called  the  Saviour 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  20.  i45 

of  the  world,  or,  the  Saviour  of  men,  Jesus  Salvator  Ilominum. 
To  reconcile  unto  himself^  does  not  mean  to  convert,  or  to 
render  friendly  to  himself.  This  is  plain  first,  because  this  re- 
conciliation is  said  to  be  effected  by  the  death  of  Christ  as 
a  sacrifice  ;  and  secondly,  because  what  follows  is  not  a  proof 
of  God's  converting  the  world,  but  it  is  a  proof  of  his  being 
propitious.  The  proof  that  God  was  reconciling  the  world  to 
himself  in  Christ  (i.  e.  in  his  death)  is  that  he  does  not  impute 
to  men  their  trespasses,  and  that  he  has  established  the  minis- 
try of  reconciliation.  The  forgiveness  of  sin  and  the  institu- 
tion of  the  ministry  are  clear  evidence  that  God  is  propitious. 
Not  to  impute  sin,  is  to  forgive  it.  Rom.  4,  5.  2  Tim.  4,  16. 
In  Col.  2,  13,  the  same  idea  is  expressed  by  saying,  "hath 
forgiven  you  all  trespasses."  The  participle  fxr]  A-oyi^o/Acvo?, 
not  imputing^  is  in  the  present  because  continuous  action  is 
intended ;  whereas  in  the  next  clause,  ^e/xevo?,  having  com,-  / 
mitted^  is  a  past  participle,  because  the  institution  of  the  min*^ 
istry  was  done  once  for  all.  To  tliem^  i.  e.  to  men,  as  included 
in  the  Koafios,  loorld.  When  God  is  said  to  forgive  men  it  of 
course  does  not  mean  that  all  men,  penitent  and  impenitent, 
believing  and  unbeheving,  are  forgiven ;  but  here,  as  before, 
the  class  of  beings  is  indicated  towards  whom  forgiveness  is 
exercised.  God  is  propitious  to  men,  as  is  manifest  by  his 
forgiving  their  trespasses.  And  hath  cor.imitted  unto  us,  koX 
^€/x€i/os  iv  rjfuv,  i.  e.  having  deposited  in  us.  This  may  mean, 
*  having  put  within  us,'  i.  e.  in  our  souls.  Or  the  idea  may  be, 
'  ha^dng  placed  upon  us.'  If  the  former,  then  the  following 
words,  rov  koyov  ttj?  KarakXayrj<;,  must  mean  '  the  doctrine  of 
reconciliation.'  That  is,  God  hath  instructed  us  apostles  in 
the  doctrine  of  reconciliation.  If  the  latter,  then  the  clause 
just  quoted  means,  'the  word  of  reconcihation,'  i.  e.  the 
preaching  of  reconciliation,  as  in  1  Cor.  1,  18,  6  A.6yos  tov  a-rav- 
pov  means  '  the  preaching  of  the  cross.'  This  latter  view  is  to 
be  preferred.  The  evidence  that  the  death  of  Christ  has  been 
accepted  as  an  expiation  for  sin,  of  infinite  value  and  efiiciency, 
is  the  fact  that  God  hath  commissioned  his  ministers  to  an- 
nounce to  all  men  that  God  is  reconciled  and  ready  to  forgive, 
so  that  whosoever  will  may  turn  unto  him  and  live. 

20.  Now  tlien  we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as 
though  God  did  beseech  (you)  by  us :  we  pray  (you) 
in  Clirist's  stead,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God. 


146  II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  20. 

This  is  an  inference  from  what  precedes.  N'oio  then  (o'f, 
therefore).  "  Seeing  that  God  in  Christ  is  reconciled,  and  that 
he  has  commissioned  ns  to  make  known  this  great  truth,  it 
follows  that  we,  as  preachers  of  the  gospel,  are  ambassadors 
of  Christ.'  An  ambassador  is  at  once  a  messenger  and  a 
representative.  He  does  not  speak  in  his  own  name.  He 
does  not  act  on  his  own  authority.  What  he  comrauni' 
cates  is  not  his  own  opinions  or  demands,  but  simply  what  he 
has  been  told  or  commissioned  to  say.  His  message  derives 
no  part  of  its  importance  or  trustworthiness  from  him. 
At  the  same  time  he  is  more  than  a  mere  messenger.  He 
represents  his  sovereign.  He  speaks  with  authority,  as  ac- 
credited to  act  in  the  name  of  his  master.  Any  neglect,  con- 
tempt or  injury  done  to  him  in  his  official  character,  is  not  a 
personal  offence,  but  an  offence  to  the  sovereign  or  state  by 
whom  he  is  commissioned.  All  this  is  true  of  ministers. 
They  are  messengers.  They  communicate  what  they  have  re- 
ceived, not  their  own  speculations  or  doctrines.  What  they 
announce  derives  its  importance  not  from  them,  but  from  him 
who  sends  them.  Nevertheless,  as  they  speak  in  Christ's 
name  and  by  his  authority,  as  he  hath  ordained  the  ministry 
and  calls  men  by  his  Spirit  into  the  sacred  office,  the  rejec- 
tion of  their  message  is  the  rejection  of  Christ,  and  any  injury 
done  unto  them  as  ministers  is  done  unto  him. 

For  Christy  virlp  Xptcrrov,  this  may  mean  either  '  in  Christ's 
stead,'  as  his  substitute  and  representative ;  or,  '  in  Christ's 
behalf,'  for  his  sake,  to  promote  his  interests  by  furthering  the 
accomplishment  of  the  object  for  which  he  died  ;  as  in  Eph. 
6,  20,  the  apostle,  speaking  of  the  gospel,  says,  vrrlp  ov  Trpeo-^euw, 
for  which  I  act  as  an  ambassador.  The  latter  sense  is  good, 
and  is  in  accordance  with  the  common  force  of  the  preposition. 
The  former,  however,  is  better  suited  to  the  context.  To  act 
as  an  ambassador  for  any  one,  is  to  act  in  his  name  or  as  his 
representative.  And  in  the  following  explanatory  clause  it  is 
said,  'God  beseeches  you  by  us,'  where  the  idea  of  substitu- 
tion is  clearly  expressed.  The  clause,  as  though  God  did  be- 
seech you  by  us,  is  commonly  connected  with  wliat  precedes. 
'  We  arc  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as  though  God  did  beseech 
you  by  us.'  That  is,  '  We  are  the  ambassadois  of  Christ,  be- 
cause it  is  God  that  speaks  through  us ;  or,  we  speak  in  his 
name.'  Beza  and  others  connect  the  words  M'ith  the  follow 
mg  clause.  '  We  are  the  ambassadors  of  Christ,'  here  is  the 
pause,  and  then  follows  as  one  clause,  'As  though  God  did 


II.   CORINTHIANS   5,  21.  147 

beseech  you  by  us  we  pray,  &c.'  This  is  the  more  natural, 
because  the  latter  words  express  the  prayer,  so  to  speak, 
which  God  through  the  ministry  addresses  to  sinners.  It  will 
be  noticed  that  to  be  an  ambassador  for  Christ,  and  that  God 
speaks  through  us,  mean  the  same  thing.  Redemption  is  as 
much  the  work  of  the  Father  as  of  the  Son.  God  reconciles 
the  world  unto  himself  in  Christ.  God  gives  us  the  word  of 
reconciliation.  We  are  acting  for  God,  or  in  his  name,  when 
we  appear  as  the  ambassadors  of  Christ.  We  j^^'^^iy  you  in 
Ghrisfs  stead.  Here  again  vwep  Xpta-Tov  may  be  either  in 
ChrisVs  stead,  or, /or  ChrisVs  sake.  The  former  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred as  better  suited  to  the  uniformity  of  the  passage.  Be 
ye  reconciled  unto  God ;  this  does  not  mean,  'Reconcile  your- 
selves unto  God.'  The  word,  KaTaAAayr/Te,  is  passive.  Be 
reconciled.,  that  is,  embrace  the  oifer  of  reconciliation.  Tlie 
reconciliation  is  effected  by  the  death  of  Christ.  God  is  now 
propitious.  He  can  now  be  just,  and  yet  justify  the  ungodly. 
AU  we  have  to  do  is  not  to  refuse  the  offered  love  of  God. 
Calvin  remarks  that  this  exhortation  is  not  directed  exclusive- 
ly to  the  unconverted.  The  believer  needs  daily,  and  is  al- 
lowed whenever  he  needs,  to  avail  himself  of  the  offer  of  peace 
with  God  through  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the 
Scriptures  that  the  merits  of  Christ  avail  only  for  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  committed  before  conversion,  while  f  )r  post-bap- 
tismal sins,  as  they  were  called,  there  is  no  satisfaction  but  in 
the  penances  of  the  offender.  Christ  ever  lives  to  make  inter- 
cession for  us,  and  for  every  short-coming  and  renewed  offence 
there  is  offered  to  the  penitent  believer,  renewed  application 
of  that  blood  which  cleanses  from  all  sin. 


21.  For  he  hath  made  him  (to  be)  sin  for  us,  Avho 
knew  no  sin ;  that  we  might  be  made  the  righteousness 
of  God  in  him 

This  verse  is  designed  to  enforce  the  preceding.  '  Be  re- 
conciled to  God,  /or  an  abundant  and  trustworthy  provision 
has  been  made  for  your  reconciliation  and  acceptance.'  It  is 
indeed  doubtful  whether  yap, /b7',  belongs  to  the  text,  as  it  is 
omitted  in  many  of  the  oldest  manuscripts.  Its  omission  only 
renders  the  transition  more  abrupt,  the  relation  of  the  passage 
remains  the  same.  The  apostle  states  in  this  verse  what  God 
has  done  for  the  justification  of  men.     The  passage,  therefore, 


148  II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  21. 

is  of  special  interest,  as  presenting  in  a  concise  form  the  testi 
mony  of  the  Spirit  on  that  all  important  subject.  He  onade 
hbn  who  knew  no  sin  to  he  sin  for  us.  The  Greek  here  is, 
Tov  fxr]  yvovra  afxapTiav  vTrep  rjjxwv  a^aapriW  iTroii^crev.  Our  Lord 
is  presented  as  one  whom  God  contemplated  as  free  from  sin 
and  yet  he  made  him  sin.  Others  understand  the  /xy  yvovra  as 
referring  to  Christ  himself,  as  one  having  no  consciousness  of 
sin.  Others  again,  to  the  necessary  judgment  of  believers,  he 
whom  we  know  was  free  from  sin.  One  or  the  other  of  these 
modes  of  interpretation  is  supposed  to  be  necessary,  as  the 
apostle  uses  /xrj  and  not  ov ;  the  one  being,  as  the  grammarians 
say,  the  subjective,  the  other  the  objective  particle  of  nega- 
tion ;  the  one  denying  a  thing  as  it  appears  to  the  mind,  the 
other  denying  it  simply  as  a  fact.  In  either  case  the  thing 
here  asserted  is  that  Christ  was  without  sin.  This  was  one  of 
the  indispensable  conditions  of  his  being  made  sin  for  us. 
Had  he  not  been  free  from  sin,  he  could  not  have  taken  the 
place  of  sinners.  Under  the  old  dispensation  the  sacrifices 
were  required  to  be  without  blemish,  in  order  to  teach  the 
necessity  of  freedom  from  all  sin  in  him  who  was  to  bear  the 
sins  of  the  world.  See  Heb.  4,  15.  1  Pet.  2,  22.  1  John  3,  -5. 
He  teas  made  si7i^  may  mean  either,  he  was  made  a  sin-offering, 
or,  the  abstract  being  used  for  the  concrete,  he  was  made  a 
sinner.  Many  of  the  older  commentators  prefer  the  former 
explanation ;  Calvin,  and  almost  all  the  moderns  adopt  the 
latter.  The  meaning  in  either  case  is  the  same  ;  for  the  only 
sense  in  which  Christ  was  made  sin,  is  that  he  bore  the  guilt 
of  sin ;  and  in  this  sense  every  sin  offering  was  made  sin. 
Hence  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  the  same  word  is  used  both 
for  sin  and  a  sin-offering.  This  is  the  principal  ground  on 
which  the  explanation  of  a/^aprta  here  in  the  sense  of  a  sacri- 
fice for  sin  is  defended.  The  reasons,  however,  against  this 
explanation  are  decisive.  1.  In  the  Septuagint  the  Hebrew 
word  for  sin,  when  it  means  a  sin-oft'ering,  is  always  rendered 
by  afj-apTLa  in  the  genitive.  It  is  always  "  of  sin,"  or  "  for  sin," 
(rrepl  afiapTLa<;),  Lev.  5,  9.  14,  19.  Num.  8,  8,  and  never  simply 
"  sin,"  as  here.  2.  The  use  of  the  word  in  the  ordinary  sense 
in  this  same  clause,  '  He  made  him  to  be  sin  who  knew  no  sin.' 
It  musL  have  the  same  meaning  in  both  cases.  3.  The  antithe- 
sis between  "sin"  and ''righteousness."  He  was  made  sin, 
we  are  made  "  lighteousness."  The  only  sense  in  which  wo 
are  made  tiie  righteousness  of  God  is  that  we  are  in  Christ  re- 
gai-<led  and  treated  as  righteous,  and  therefore  the  sense  in 


II.   CORINTHIANS  5,  21.  Ud 

which  he  was  made  sin,  is  that  he  was  regarded  and  treated 
as  a  sinner.  His  being  made  sin  is  consistent  with  his  being 
in  himself  free  from  sin ;  and  our  being  made  righteous  is  con- 
sistent with  our  being  in  ourselves  ungodly.  In  other  words, 
our  sins  were  imputed  to  Christ,  and  his  righteousness  is  im- 
puted to  us.  Justitia  hie  non  pro  quaUtate  aut  habitu,  says 
Calvin,  sed  pro  imputatione  accipitur,  eo  quod  accepta  nobis 
fertur  Christi  justitia.     Quod  e  converso  peccatum?  reatus 

quo  in  Dei  judicio  obstringimur Personam  enim  nos- 

tram  quodammodo  suscepit,  ut  reus  nostro  nomine  fieret,  et 
tanquam  peccator  judicaretur,  non  propriis,  sed  alienis  dehctis, 
quum  purus  foret  ipse  et  immunis  ab  omni  culpa,  poenamque 
subiret  nobis,  non  sibi  debitam.  Ita  scilicit  nunc  justi  sumus 
in  ipso:  non  quia  operibus  propriis  satisfaciamus  judicio  Dei, 
sed  quoniam  censimur  Christi  justitia,  quara  fide  induimus,  ut 
nostra  fiat.  In  Gal.  3,  13,  the  apostle  says  that  "Christ  was 
made  a  curse  for  us,"  which  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  he 
was  made  sin  for  us.  In  both  cases  the  idea  is  that  he  bore 
the  punishment  of  our  sins.  God  laid  on  him  the  iniquities 
of  us  all.  His  sufierings  and  death  were  penal,  because  inflict- 
ed and  endured  in  satisfaction  of  justice.  And  in  virtue  of 
the  infinite  dignity  of  his  person  they  were  a  perfect  satisfac- 
tion ;  that  is,  a  full  equivalent  for  all  the  law's  demands.  In 
Rom.  8,  3,  it  is  said,  "  What  the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it 
was  w^eak  through  the  flesh,  God,  sending  his  own  Son  in  the 
likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh." 
Here  again  we  have  precisely  the  same  doctrine.  What  in 
one  passage  is  expressed  by  saying  that  Christ  was  made  sin, 
in  the  other  is  expressed  by  saying,  he  was  sent  "  for  sin,"  i.  e. 
as  a  sin-ofiering  (Trept  a/xaprta';). 

The  apostle  says  Christ  was  made  sin  J'o?'  us,  v-n-lp  rj/xCjp, 
i.  e.  in  our  stead,  because  the  idea  of  substitution  is  involved 
in  the  very  nature  of  the  transaction.  The  victim  was  the 
substitute  for  the  oflfender.  It  was  put  in  his  place.  So 
Christ  was  our  substitute,  or,  was  put  in  our  place.  This  is 
the  more  apparent  from  the  following  clause,  which  teaches 
the  design  of  this  substitution.  He  Avas  made  sin,  that  we 
might  be  made  righteous.  He  was  condemned,  that  we 
might  be  justified.  The  very  idea  of  substitution  is  that  what 
is  done  by  one  in  the  place  of  another,  avails  as  though  that 
other  had  done  it  himself.  The  victim  was  the  substitute  of 
the  ofterer,  because  its  death  took  the  place  of  his  death.  K 
both  died  there  was  no  substitution.     So  if  Christ's  being 


150  II     CORIISTTHIANS   5,  21. 

made  sin  does  not  secure  our  being  made  righteousness,  lie  ' 
was  not  our  substitute.  Righteousness  does  not  here  mean 
inward  rectitude,  or  moral  excellence.  It  is  true  that  the 
word  often  has  this  sense ;  and  it  is  true  that  the  work  of 
Christ  does  secure  the  holiness  of  his  people,  and  was  designed 
to  produce  that  effect,  as  is  often  asserted  in  Scripture.  But 
this  was  neither  its  only,  nor  its  proximate  design.  Its  imme- 
diate end  was  to  reconcile  us  to  God ;  to  propitiate  him,  by 
the  satisfaction  of  justice,  so  that  he  can  be  just  and  yet  justi- 
fy the  ungodly.  As  the  apostle  is  here  speaking  of  the  sacri- 
ficial effect  of  Christ's  death,  that  is,  of  the  proximate  effect 
of  his  being  made  sin  for  us,  the  word  righteousness  must  be 
understood  in  its  forensic  sense.  It  expresses  our  relation  to 
the  law,  not  our  inward  moral  state.  It  is  that  which  justifies, 
or  satisfies  the  demands  of  the  law.  Those  who  have  this 
SsKOAocrvvr}  are  StKatot,  just  in  the  sight  of  the  law,  in  the  sense 
that  the  law  or  justice  is  satisfied  as  concerns  them.  It  is 
called  the  righteousness  of  God,  either  because  it  is  from  him 
as  its  author ;  or,  because  it  renders  us  righteous  in  his  sight. 
Those  "vt'ho  possess  this  righteousness  are  StKatot  Trapa  t<5  ^ew, 
i.  e.  righteous  before  God.  The  former  is  the  more  common 
representation  in  Paul's  writings.  Rom.  1,  17.  3,  22.  10,  3. 
Phil.  3,  9,  where  "  the  righteousness  of  God,"  is  explained  by 
"  the  righteousness  which  is  of  God."  In  this  view  of  the 
meaning  of  the  phrase,  the  sense  of  the  clause  "  we  become 
the  righteousness  of  God,"  is  that  we  become  divinely  right- 
eous. We  are  righteous  with  the  righteousness  of  God,  not 
with  our  own  which  is  but  as  a  filthy  rag,  but  with  that  which 
he  has  provided  and  which  consists  in  the  infinitely  meritori- 
ous righteousness  of  his  own  dear  Son.  All  this  is  true ;  but 
the  context  here  favours  the  other  mode  of  representation. 
Christ  was  treated  as  a  sinner,  i.  e.  condemned,  that  we  might 
be  justified,  i.  e.  regarded  as  just  before  God.  The  apostle 
uses  the  present  tense,  ytvw/xe^a,  ^De  become  righteous,  because 
this  justification  is  continuous.  We  are  introduced  into  a  jus- 
tified state.  Iji  him,  that  is,  in  Christ.  It  is.  by  virtue  of  our 
union  with  Christ,  and  only  as  we  are  in  him  by  faith,  that  we 
are  righteous  before  God. 

There  is  probably  no  passage  in  the  Scriptures  in  which 
the  doctrine  of  justification  is  more  concisely  or  clearly  stated 
than  in  this.  Our  sins  were  imputed  to  Christ,  and  his  right- 
eousness is  imputed  to  us.  He  bore  our  sins ;  we  are  clothed 
in  his  righteousness.     Imputation  conveys  neither  pollutiou 


II.   CORINTHIANS  6.  151 

nor  holiness.  Christ's  bearing  our  sins  did  not  make  him 
morally  a  sinner,  any  more  than  the  victim  was  morally  defiled 
which  bore  the  sins  of  the  people  ;  nor  does  Christ's  righteous- 
ness become  subjectively  ours,  it  is  not  the  moral  quality  of 
our  souls.  This  is  what  is  not  meant.  What  is  meant  is 
equally  plain.  Our  sins  were  the  judicial  ground  of  the  suf- 
ferings of  Christ,  so  that  they  were  a  satisfaction  of  justice; 
and  his  righteousness  is  the  judicial  ground  of  our  acceptance 
with  God,  so  that  our  pardon  is  an  act  of  justice.  It  is  a 
justification;  or,  a  declaration  that  justice  is  satisfied.  We 
are  set  free  by  no  mere  act  of  sovereignty,  but  by  the  judicial 
decision  of  the  infinitely  just.  As  we,  considered  in  ourselves, 
are  just  as  undeserving  and  hell-deserving  as  ever,  this  justifi- 
cation is  to  us  an  act  of  infinite  grace.  The  special  considera- 
tion, therefore,  by  which  the  apostle  enforces  the  exhortation, 
'  Be  ye  reconciled  to  God,'  is  that  God  can  be  just  in  the  justi- 
fication of  sinners.  There  is  nothing  in  the  perfection  of  his 
character,  nothing  in  the  immutability  of  his  law,  nothing  in 
the  interests  of  his  moral  government,  that  stands  in  the  way 
of  our  pardon.  A  full,  complete,  infinitely  meritorious  satis- 
faction has  been  made  for  our  sins,  and  therefore  we  may 
come  to  God  with  the  assurance  of  being  accepted.  This  is  a 
ground  of  confidence  which  an  enlightened  conscience,  bur- 
dened with  a  sense  of  sin,  absolutely  needs."  It  is  not  mere 
pardon,  but  justification  alone,  that  gives  us  peace  with  God. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


The  apostle  continues  the  vindication  of  himself,  vs.  1-10.  Asserts  his 
strong  love  for  the  Corinthians,  and  exhorts  them  to  keep  themselves 
free  from  all  contaminating  alliances,  vs.  11-18. 

The,  apostle'' s  fidelity  and  love.     Vs.  1-18. 

As  the  occasion  of  writing  this  epistle  was  the  false  accusa- 
tions of  his  opponents,  a  strain  of  self-vindication  runs  through 
the  whole.  In  5,  12  he  said  he  spoke  of  himself  to  enable  his 
friends  in  Corinth  to  defend  him  against  his  enemies.     I[e  was 

7* 


152  II.   CORINTHIANS  6,  1. 

governed  by  the  love  of  Christ,  and  acted  as  his  ambassador 
as  sach  he  was  a  fellow-worker  with  God,  and  exhorted  men 
not  to  fail  of  the  grace  of  God,  vs.  1.  2.  In  the  exercise  of 
this  office  he  avoided  all  offence,  v.  3,  proving  his  sincerity 
and  hdelity  as  a  minister  of  God,  by  the  patient  endurance  of 
all  kinds  of  trials,  vs.  4.  5 ;  by  the  exercise  of  all  the  graces 
and  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  vs.  6.  Y ;  and  under  all  circumstances, 
whether  of  honour  or  dishonour,  prosperity  or  adversity, 
whether  understood  or  misunderstood  by  his  fellow  men,  vs. 
8-10.  He  thus  unbosomed  himself  to  the  Corinthians,  be- 
cause his  heart  was  enlarged.  It  was  wide  enough  to  take 
them  all  in.  Whatever  there  was  of  the  want  of  love  or  of 
due  appreciation  between  them  and  him,  the  fault  was  on 
their  side,  not  on  his,  vs.  11.  12.  He  begs  them  to  be  as 
large-hearted  towards  him  as  he  was  towards  them,  v.  13,  and 
not  to  allow  themselves  to  be  involved  in  any  intimate  alli- 
ances with  the  wicked,  vs.  13-18. 

1.  We  then,  (as)  workers  together  (with  him),  be- 
seech (you)  also  that  ye  receive  not  the  grace  of  God 
in  vain. 

This  verse  is  intimately  connected  with  the  preceding 
chapter  by  the  particles  Se  /cat,  hut  also.  He  is  still  describ- 
ing his  manner  of  discharging  his  apostolic  duties.  He  not 
only  announced  that  God  had  made  Christ  sin  for  us,  that  we 
might  become  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him,  but  also,  as  a 
co-worker  with  God,  he  exhorted  men  not  to  receive  the 
grace  of  God  in  vain.  In  our  version  the  apostle  is  made  to 
say,  "  I  beseech  you  also."  This  is  wrong ;  the  also  belongs 
to  the  verb — "I  also  beseech  you."  That  the  word  crwip- 
yoi}vT£9,  co-operating^  refers  to  the  apostle's  co-operating  with 
God,  is  plain  from  the  connection,  and  from  the  nature  of  the 
work.  He  had  just  before,  5,  20,  spoken  of  God's  beseeching 
them ;  and  now  he  says,  we  as  co-workers  beseech  you.  So 
in  1  Cor.  3,  9,  he  says,  "  We  are  co-workers  with  God."  In 
the  Vulgate  the  word  is  rendered  adjuva^ites^  which  favours 
the  idea  that  he  was  co-operating  with  them,  assisting  them 
(i.  e.  the  Corinthians)  by  his  exhortations.  Luther's  version 
suggests  the  same  meaning ;  Wir  ermahen  abcr  euch,  als 
Mithelfer,  as  joint-labourers  or  heljyers  we  exhort  you.  Com- 
pare 1,  24,  where  the  apostle  says,  "  We  are  helpers  ((rwcpyot) 


II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  1.  153 

of  your  joy."  This  view  of  the  jmssage  is  given  by  mauy 
commentators.  It  does  not,  however,  so  well,  as  jnst  re- 
marked, agree  with  the  context ;  and  it  would  require,  to 
prevent  ambiguity,  the  insertion  of  vfuv,  icith  you.  As  an 
apostle  or  minister  of  the  gospel,  Paul  was  a  co-worker  with 
God. 

That  ye  receive  not  the  grace  of  God  in  vain.  What  is 
it  to  receive  the  grace  of  God  in  vain  ?  Some  say  that  the 
meaning  is  to  accept  of  the  atonement  of  Christ,  or  reconciha- 
tion  with  God  spoken  of  in  the  preceding  chapter,  and  yet  to 
live  in  sin.  The  favour  of  God  is  then  accepted  to  no  purpose. 
But  this  is  an  unscriptural  idea.  Justification  and  sanctifica- 
tion  cannot  be  thus  separated.  A  man  cannot  accept  of  recon- 
ciliation with  God  and  live  in  sin ;  because  the  renunciation 
of  sin  is  involved  in  the  acceptance  of  reconciliation.  Paul 
never  assumes  that  men  may  accept  one  benefit  of  redemption, 
and  reject  another.  They  cannot  take  pardon  and  refuse 
sanctification.  Others  say  that  the  apostle  here  exhorts  his 
readers  to  guard  against  "  falling  from  grace ; "  that  having 
been  graciously  pardoned  they  should  not,  by  a  relapse  into 
sin,  forfeit  the  grace  or  favour  which  they  had  received.  This 
is  a  very  common  interpretation.  Olshausen  says,  "  It  is  un- 
deniable that  the  apostle  assumes  that  grace  when  once  re- 
ceived may  be  lost ;  the  Scriptures  know  nothing  of  the  dan- 
gerous error  of  the  advocates  of  predestination,  that  grace 
cannot  be  lost ;  and  experience  stamps  it  as  a  lie."  But  in 
the  first  place,  it  is  no  argument  in  favour  of  this  interpreta- 
tion that  the  apostle  uses  the  infinitive  aorist  (Se^ao-^at),  have 
received^  because  the  aorist  infinitive  is  very  commonly  used 
for  the  present  after  verbs  signifying  to  command  or  exhort. 
See  Rom.  12,  1.  15,  20.  2  Cor.  2,  8.  Eph.  4,  1.  Winer's  Idioms 
of  the  New  Testament,  p.  386.  m  the  second  place,  the 
*'  grace  of  God,"  here  spoken  of,  does  not  mean  the  actual 
forgiveness  of  sin,  nor  the  renewing,  sanctifying  influence  of 
the  Spirit,  but  the  favour  of  which  the  apostle  spoke  in  the 
preceding  chapter.  It  is  the  infinite  grace  or  favour  of  having 
made  his  Son  sin  for  us,  so  that  mc  may  become  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  in  him.  This  is  the  grace  of  God  of  which  the 
apo.stle  speaks.  He  e?:horted  men  not  to  let  it  be  in  vain,  as 
ii  regarded  them,  that  a  satisfaction  for  sin  sufiicient  for  all, 
;  lid  appropriate  to  all,  had  been  made  and  offered  to  all  Avho 
hoar. the  gospel.  In  precisely  the  same  sense  he  says,  Gal.  2, 
'J I.  '•!  do  not  frustrate  the  grace  of  God."     That  is,  'I  do 


164  II.   CORINTHIANS  6,  2, 

not,  by  trusting  to  the  Avorks  of  the  law,  make  it  in  vain  that 
God  has  provided  a  gratuitous  method  of  salvation.'  That 
great  grace  or  favour  he  did  not  make  a  thing  of  naught.  In 
Gal.  5,  4,  he  says,  "  Whosoever  of  you  are  justified  by  the  law, 
are  fallen  from  grace."  That  is,  'ye  have  renounced  the  gra- 
tuitous method  of  salvation,  and  are  debtors  to  do  the  whole 
law.'  So  in  Rom.  6,  14,  it  is  said,  "We  are  not  under  law, 
but  under  grace."  In  no  one  of  these  cases  does  "  grace " 
mean  either  the  actual  pardon  of  sin,  or  inward  divine  influ- 
ence. It  means  the  favour  of  God,  and  in  this  connection  the 
great  favour  of  redemption.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  having 
died  for  our  sins  and  procured  eternal  redemption  for  us,  the 
a]Dostle  was  most  earnest  in  exhorting  men  not  to  allow  this 
great  favour,  as  regards  them,  to  be  in  vain.  It  is  the  more 
evident  that  such  is  the  meaning  of  the  passage  because  it  is 
not  so  much  a  direct  exhortation  to  the  Corinthians,  as  a 
declaration  of  the  method  in  which  the  apostle  preached.  He 
announced  the  fact  that  God  had  made  Christ  who  knew  no  sin 
to  be  sin  for  us,  and  he  exhorted  all  men  not  to  receive  the 
grace  of  God  in  vain,  that  is,  not  to  reject  this  great  salvation. 
And  finally,  this  interpretation  is  required  by  the  following 
verse.  "  Behold,  now  is  the  accepted  time ;  now  is  the  day 
of  salvation."  This  is  appropriate  as  a  motive  to  receive  the 
offer  of  pardon  and  acceptance  with  God,  but  it  is  not  appro- 
priate as  a  reason  Avhy  a  renewed  and  pardoned  sinner  should 
not  fall  from  grace.  There  is  therefore  no  necessity  to  as- 
sume, contrary  to  the  Avhole  analogy  of  Scripture,  that  the 
apostle  here  teaches  that  those  who  have  once  made  their 
peace  with  God  and  experienced  liis  renewing  grace  can  fall 
away  unto  perdition.  If  reconciled  by  the  death  of  his  Son, 
much  more  shall  they  be  saved  by  his  life.  Nothing  can  ever 
separate  them  from  the  love  of  God  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 
Whom  he  calls,  them  he  also  glorifies.  They  are  kept  by  the 
mighty  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  salvation. 

2.  (For  he  saitli,  I  have  heard  thee  in  a  time  ac- 
cepted, and  in  the  day  of  salvation  have  I  succoured 
thee ;  behold,  now  (is)  the  accepted  time ;  behold,  now 
(is)  the  day  of  salvation,) 

The  Scriptures  contain  abundant  evidence  that  inspiration 
did  not  interfere  with  the  natural  play  of  the  powers  of  the 


II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  2.  155 

sacred  writers.  Although  they  spoke  as  they  were  moved  by 
the  Holy  Ghost,  yet  they  were  probably  in  most  cases  uncon- 
scious of  his  influence,  and  acted  as  spontaneously  as  the  be- 
liever does  under  the  power  of  the  Spirit  in  all  his  holy  exer 
cises.  Hence  we  tind  that  the  sacred  writino-8  are  constructed 
according  to  the  ordinary  laws  of  mind,  and  that  the  writers 
pass  from  subject  to  subject  by  the  usual  jjrocess  of  suggestion 
and  association.  So  here  the  use  of  the  word  Se^acr^at  brought 
up  to  the  apostle's  mind  the  word  Scktw,  as  it  occurs  in  the 
beautiful  passage,  Is.  49,  8.  Hence  the  quotation  of  that  pas- 
sage as  it  stands  in  tlie  Greek  version  of  the  Old  Testament. 
I  have  heard  thee  in  an  accepted  time.  In  the  Hebrew  it  is,  a 
time  of  grace  ;  and  to  this  answers  the  equivalent  expression, 
the  day  of  salvation.  It  is  on  these  expressions  that  the  ap- 
propriateness of  the  citation  rests.  The  Old  Testament  speaks 
of  "a  time  of  grace,"  and  of  "a  day  of  salvation."  That  is, 
of  a  time  and  a  day  in  v/hich  grace  and  salvation  may  be 
obtained.  The  apostle  adds,  by  way  of  comment  and  applica- 
tion, "  Behold,  now  is  the  accepted  time  ;  behold,  now  is  the 
day  of  salvation."  The  connection  between  this  verse  and 
what  precedes  is  thus  clear.  '  Receive  not  the  grace  of  God 
in  vain, /or  there  is  a  time  of  grace  and  a  day  of  salvation,  and 
that  day  is  now.  Therefore,  neglect  not  this  great  salvation.* 
The  49th  chapter  of  Isaiah,  whence  this  passage  is  taken,  is 
addressed  to  the  Messiah.  He  it  was  whom  God  chose  to  be 
his  servant  to  restore  Israel  and  to  be  a  light  to  the  Gentiles. 
He  it  was  whom  man  despised  and  the  nation  abhorred,  to 
whom  kings  should  rise  and  princes  worship.  It  was  he  to 
whom  Jehovah  said,  "I  have  heard  thee  in  an  accepted  time, 
and  in  the  day  of  salvation  have  I  succoured  thee."  This  be- 
ing the  case,  the  use  which  the  apostle  makes  of  the  passage 
may  be  explained  either  on  the  hypothesis  adopted  by  Dr.  J. 
A.  Alexander,  in  liis  comment  on  this  chapter,  that  the  ideal 
person  addressed  is  not  the  Messiah  exclusively,  but  the  Mes- 
siah and  his  people  as  represented  in  him.  Therefore  a  prom- 
ise of  grace  and  salvation  to  the  Messiah  was  at  the  same  time 
a  promise  of  grace  and  salvation  to  his  people.  This  is  the 
view  which  Bengel  adopts.  '"''He  saith,  the  Father  to  Messi 
ah,  Is.  49,  8,  embracing  in  him  all  believers."  Or  we  may 
assume,  in  strict  accordance  with  scriptural  usage,  that  the 
apostle  employs  the  language  of  the  Old  Testament  to  express 
his  own  ideas,  without  regard  to  its  original  application.  God 
had  in  many  ways,  and  on  many  occasions,  promised  to  save 


156  II.    CORINTHIANS   6,  3. 

sinners.  To  this  promise  the  apostle  appeals  as  a  reason  why 
men  should  accept  the  grace  offered  to  them  in  Christ  Jesus. 
He  clothes  this  promise  in  scriptural  language.  He  might 
have  expressed  it  in  any  otlier  equivalent  form.  But  the  lan- 
guage of  the  passage  in  Isaiah  being  brought  to  his  mind  by 
the  principle  of  association,  he  adopts  the  form  there  given, 
without  any  intimation,  expressed  or  implied,  that  the  passage 
had  not  in  the  original  a  different  application.  Thus  in  Rom. 
10, 18  he  might  have  expressed  the  idea  of  the  general  proclama- 
tion  of  the  gospel  in  his  own  words,  but  he  chose  to  express  it 
in  the  words  of  the  nineteenth  Psalm,  "Their  sound  went  into 
all  the  earth,  and  their  words  unto  the  ends  of  the  world ; " 
although  that  Psalm  relates  to  an  entirely  different  subject. 
We  are  accustomed,  without  hesitation  and  almost  uncon- 
sciously, to  make  a  similar  use  of  scriptural  language. 

3.  Giving  no  offence  in  any  thing,  that  the  ministry 
be  not  blamed. 

The  preceding  verse  is  parenthetical,  so  that  the  connec- 
tion is  with  V.  1 .  "  We  beseech — giving,  <S:c."  This  and  the 
following  participles  are  all  connected  with  the  word  (Trapa- 
/caXou/xci/)  ice  beseech^  or  exhort^  and  are  designed  to  show  how 
the  apostle  discharged  the  duties  of  his  office.  This  is  his  de- 
fence. In  oiothing  he  gave  offence.  He  so  acted  that  no  one 
could  fairly  make  his  conduct  a  ground  of  rejecting  the  gos- 
pel. The  word  Trpoo-KOTrrj  is  properly  the  act  of  striking  or 
stumbling;  then  metonymically,  that  at  which  or  against 
which  any  one  stumbles.  In  the  figurative  use  of  the  word, 
as  here  employed,  it  means  an  occasion  of  unbelief  Paul,  in 
preaching  the  gospel  to  those  to  whom  it  was  previously  un- 
known, and  whose  principal  means  of  judging  of  it  was  the 
conduct  of  its  preachers,  was  specially  careful  to  avoid  every 
thing  which  could  prove  a  stumblingblock  to  his  hearers. 
Although  this  motive  has  peculiar  weight  where  the  gospel  is 
new,  as  among  the  heath.en,  yet  every  one  knows  that  the 
moral  power  of  a  preacher  depends  almost  entirely  on  tho 
conviction  which  the  people  have  of  his  sincerity  and  of  the 
purity  of  his  motives.  This  is  a  source  of  power  for  which 
neither  learning  nor  talents  can  compensate.  That  the  rninis' 
try  be  not  blamed ;  or,  as  it  is  in  many  copies,  our  ministry^ 
which  gives  the  passage  a  most  specific  reference  to  himselt^ 
ttiid  is  well  suited  to  the  whole  connection. 


II.   CORINTIIIAXS   6,  4.  5.  157 

Although  in  the  following  verses  the  apostle,  as  is  his  wont, 
gives  his  discourse  free  scope,  allowing  it,  as  it  were,  to  flow 
on  in  its  own  impetuous  and  majestic  course,  without  any  at- 
tempt to  reduce  it  to  logical  arrangement,  yet  in  his  mind 
order  was  so  immanent  that  a  certain  method  can  always  be 
detected  even  in  his  most  impassioned  utterances.  So  here, 
he  first  refers  to  the  manifold  trials,  vs.  4.  5,  then  to  the  graces 
and  gifts,  vs.  6.  7,  by  which  his  sincerity  had  been  tested  and 
established ;  and  then  to  the  diverse  circumstances  of  evil  and 
of  good  report,  under  Avhich  he  had  maintained  his  integrity, 
vs.  8.  9.  10.  Under  these  several  heads  there  are  the  same 
number  of  specifications,  nine  in  each.  Under  the  two  former, 
there  is  a  ternary  arrangement  observable  ;  three  divisions, 
each  with  three  specifications ;  and  under  the  last,  nine  pairs 
of  contrasts  or  antitheses,  rising  to  that  highest  form  of  ora- 
torical language,  where  truth  is  expressed  in  seeming  contra- 
dictions.    "  Having  nothing,  yet  possessing  all  things." 

4.  5.  But  in  all  (things)  approving  ourselves  as  the 
ministers  of  God,  in  much  patience,  in  afflictions,  in 
necessities,  in  distresses,  in  stripes,  in  imprisonments, 
in  tumults,  in  labours,  in  watchings,  in  fastings. 

So  far  from  causing  the  ministry  to  be  blamed,  Paul  in  all 
things^  [Iv  Travrt,)  in  every  relation.,  and  on  every  occasion^  ap- 
proved himself,  i.  e.  commended  himself,  not  by  self-laudation, 
but  by  so  acting  as  to  force  the  conviction  of  his  sincerity  on 
all  men.  As  the  ministers  of  God.,  i.  e.  as  the  ministers  of 
God  commend  themselves.  This  interpretation  is  required,  as 
Paul  uses  SiaKovot,  not  StaKovovs.  It  was  as  a  minister  he  com- 
mended himself  lyi  much  patience.,  i.  e.  by  patient  endur- 
ance and  constancy.  Both  ideas  are  expressed  by  the  word 
vTToixovrj.  Paul  proved  himself  to  be  a  true  minister  of  Christ 
by  the  fortitude  with  which  he  endured  sufferings,  and  by  the 
constancy  with  which  he  adhered  to  his  master  under  all  these 
trials.  In  what  follows  in  this  and  the  next  verse  we  have  the 
trials  enumerated  to  which  he  was  subjected.  These  are  ar- 
ranged, as  Bengel  remarks,  m  three  classes.  The  first,  are 
general,  afflictio?is^  Jiecessities.,  and  distresses  ;  the  second  are 
specific,  strijyes,  imprisonments ^  and  timiidts  ;  the  third,  vol- 
untary, labours.,  vmtchings.,  a7id  fastings.  His  constancy  was 
exhibited  in  the  cheerful  endurance  of  all  these  kinds  of  trials. 


158  II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  4.  5. 

As  to  the  first,  the  terms  used  are  often  interchanged  and 
often  combined.  ©Ati//€is,  pressures^  from  without  or  from 
within ;  including  every  thing  which  presses  on  the  heart  or 
tries  the  power  of  endurance  or  resistance ;  avayKat,  necessities, 
when  a  man  is  taxed  to  the  utmost  to  know  what  to  do  or 
how  to  bear;  o-revoxwptat,  straits^  when  one  has  no  room  to 
stand  or  turn,  and  therefore  escape  seems  hopeless.  It  is  op- 
posed to  largeness  of  place.  "  He  brought  my  feet  into  a 
large  place,"  as  the  Psalmist  says.  The  preposition  Iv  is  to  be 
rendered  hy  before  vitojxovr}^  and  in  before  all  the  other  nouns 
in  these  two  verses.  He  commended  himself  hy  patience,  in 
afflictions,  in  necessities,  &c.,  &q.  In  stri2?es.  Paul,  as  we 
learn  fiom  11,  24.  25,  had  already,  at  this  period  of  his  history, 
been  eight  times  subjected  to  the  ignominy  and  torture  of  the 
lash,  five  times  by  the  Jews  and  thrice  by  the  heathen.  J?i 
im2oriso7iments.  How  often  the  apostle  was  in  prison  we 
know  not,  as  the  Acts  contain  only  a  small  part  of  his  history. 
He  was  a  prisoner  at  Philippi,  at  Jerusalem,  at  Cesarea,  and 
at  Rome ;  and  when  a  prisoner  his  feet  were  in  the  stocks,  or 
he  was  chained.  The  Holy  Ghost  testified  that  in  every  place 
"bonds  and  afflictions"  awaited  him.  In  tumults.  The 
word  is  d/caTao-Tao-tat,  which  may  mean  "  tossings  to  and  fro," 
and  refer  to  Paul's  being  constantly  driven  from  one  place  to 
another,  so  that  he  had  no  quiet  abode.  This  he  mentions  as 
one  of  his  sore  trials  in  1  Cor.  4,  11.  The  Avord,  however,  in 
the  New  Testament  always  elsewhere  means  either  disorder 
or  tumultuous  outbreaks.  Luke  21,  9.  To  these  violent  bursts 
of  popular  feeling  the  apostle  was  frequently  exposed,  as  at 
Antioch  in  Pisidia,  Acts  13,  50 ;  at  Lystra,  14,  19  ;  at  Philippi, 
16,  19  ;  at  Ephesus,  Acts  19,  29  ;  at  Jerusalem,  21,  30.  Before 
these  manifestations  of  wrath  and  power  the  bravest  men  often 
quail.  Such  tumults  can  neither  be  resisted  by  force,  nor  be 
stilled  by  the  voice.  What  can  one  man  do  before  an  infuri- 
ated mob  ?  He  could  as  well  resist  a  tornado.  Yet  he  can 
be  calm  and  adhere  to  his  purpose.  "  It  is  often  required," 
says  Calvin,  "of  ministers  of  the  gospel,  that  while  they  strive 
for  peace,  they  should  pass  unbroken  through  tumults,  and 
never  deflect  from  the  right  course  though  heaven  and  earth 
should  be  mixed."  Besides  these  trials  which  came  upon  the 
apostle  against  his  will,  or  without  his  agency,  there  were 
painful  sacrifices  which  he  made  voluntarily,  and  which  were 
among  the  strongest  proofs  of  his  sincerity.  These  were  his 
labours^  watchings,  and  fastings.     By  labours  are  to  be  un- 


II.   CORINTHIAXS   6,  6.  Y.  159 

derstood  not  only  his  working  with  his  own  hands  to  support 
himself  while  he  made  the  gospel  of  no  expense,  but  also  the 
indefatigable  exertions  which  he  was  constantly  called  to 
make,  in  travelling,  and  preaching,  and  in  caring  for  the  sick, 
the  poor,  and  the  interests  of  the  church.  Wafchings,  the 
sleepless  nights  which  liis  constantly  travelling,  his  anxieties 
and  labours  caused  him  to  pass.  Fastings ;  this  is  often 
understood  to  refer  to  his  suffering  from  hunger.  But  the 
word  v7]aT€La  is  never  used  for  in\'olantary  abstinence  from 
food,  and  as  it  occurs  here  in  connection  with  labours  and 
watchings,  both  of  which  were  voluntary  acts  of  self-denial, 
it  is  probably  to  be  taken  in  its  ordinary  sense.  Perhaps, 
however,  the  reference  is  to  those  cases  of  abstinence  which 
were  in  a  measure  forced  upon  him,  or  which  he  chose  to  sub- 
mit to  rather  than  to  omit  some  duty  or  to  fail  to  take  advan- 
tage of  some  opportunity  of  usefulness.  There  is  nothing  in 
the  connection  to  demand  a  reference  to  religious  fasting,  as 
when  prayers  and  fasting  are  mentioned  together.  Here  it  is 
labours  and  fastings. 

6.  7.  By  pureness,  by  knowledge,  by  long-suffer- 
ing, by  kindness,  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  love  unfeigned, 
by  the  word  of  truth,  by  the  power  of  God,  by  the  ar- 
mour of  righteousness  on  the  right  hand  and  on  the 
left. 

As  the  apostle  commended  himself  in  the  various  trials 
enumerated  in  the  two  jjreceding  verses,  so  b^  the  graces  and 
gifts  here  specified,  it  was  made  manifest  to  all  that  he  was  a 
true  apostle  and  faithful  minister  of  God.  3y  pureness^  both 
of  heart  and  life.  This  includes  not  merely  freedom  from  the 
pollution  of  immoral  acts,  but  disinterestedness  and  singleness 
of  motive.  -Sy  knoioledge  ;  what  kind  or  form  of  knowledge 
is  here  indicated  can  only  be  gathered  from  the  context. 
Some  say  it  is  the  knowledge  of  the  fitness  and  propriety  of 
things,  which  exhibits  itself  as  discretion.  But  as  the  apostle 
is  speaking  of  those  things  which  commended  him  as  a  minis- 
ter of  God  and  preacher  of  the  gospel,  and  as  several  of  the 
other  specifications  in  these  two  verses,  refer  to  gifts  as  dis- 
tinguished from  graces,  it  is  more  probable  that  the  reference 
is  to  evangelical  knowledge ;  that  knowledge  which  he  mani- 
fested in  his  teaching.     Comp.  Eph.  3,  4,  where  he  speaks  of 


160  II.   CORINTHIANS  6,  6.  1. 

his  knowledge  of  the  mystery  of  Christ,  as  patent  to  all  his 
readers.  And  in  Gal.  1,  12,  e^  seq.^  he  appeals  to  his  possession 
of  this  knowledge,  without  any  human  teaching,  as  an  unde- 
niable proof  of  his  divine  mission.  £y  long-suffering^  i.  e. 
patiently  submitting  to  injustice  and  undeserved  injuries.  By 
kindness^  i.  e.  )(prjcrT6T7]<i  (fiom  -^^rjaTos,  useful)  benevolence  ;  a 
disposition  to  do  good ;  as  God  is  said  to  be  kind  to  the  un- 
thankful  and  the  evil,  Luke  6,  35.  JBy  the  Holy  Ghost ; 
that  is,  by  the  manifestation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  dwelling  in 
me.  It  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures,  and  specially  of 
Paul's  writings,  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwells  in  all  believers, 
and  that  besides  those  manifestations  of  his  presence  common 
to  all,  there  is  given  to  each  one  his  special  gift,  whether  or- 
dinary or  extraordinary ;  to  one  wisdom,  to  another  knowl- 
edge, to  another  the  gift  of  teaching,  to  another  the  working 
of  miracles,  &c.  1  Cor.  12,  7-11.  In  proof  of  his  being  a  true 
minister  of  God,  Paul  appeals  to  the  evidence  of  the  presence 
of  the  Spirit  in  him,  which  evidence  was  to  be  found  in  those 
graces  and  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost  with  which  he  was  replen- 
ished ;  and  in  the  divine  power  which  attended  and  rendered 
successful  his  preaching.  He  could  appeal  to  his  converts  and 
say,  *' Ye  are  the  seal  of  my  apostleship  in  the  Lord,"  1  Cor. 
9,  2.  JBy  love  tmfeigned.  As  in  the  preceding  clause  he  re- 
ferred to  kindness  or  benevolence,  here  love  must  be  taken  in 
the  restricted  sense  of  Christian  love — not  that  affection  which 
is  exercised  towards  the  just  and  the  unjust,  but  that  which 
springs  from  the  peculiar  relations  of  the  believer  to  God  and 
to  his  brethren.  It  is  brotherly  love,  or  the  love  of  the  bretli- 
ren  as  such.  By  the  word  of  truths  that  is,  by  the  preaching 
of  the  truth,  or  preaching  the  contents  of  which  is  truth.  The 
reference  is  not  to  veracity,  but  to  the  exhibition  of  the  truth 
in  his  preaching.  In  a  j^revious  chapter,  4,  2,  he  had  said, 
''By  the  manifestation  of  the  truth  I  commend  myself  to 
every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God."  By  the  poxcer  of 
God.  The  power  of  God  was  manifested  in  various  ways  in 
Paul's  ministry.  "  IVe  that  wrought  in  Peter,"  he  says,  "  to 
the  apostleship  of  the  circumcision,  the  same  was  mighty  in 
me  towards  the  Gentiles,"  Gal.  2,  8.  By  these  various  mani- 
festations of  di\ine  power  in  his  conversion,  in  his  preparation 
for  his  Avork,  and  in  the  exercise  of  his  apostleshij^,  he  was 
proved  to  be  a  true  servant  of  God.  By  the  armour  of 
righteousness.  The  word  "  righteousness "  is  used  in  Scrip- 
ture in  two  senses.     It  means  either  rectitude,  uprightness, 


II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  8-10.  161 

honesty,  in  the  comprehensive  sense  of  the  terms ;  or  it  means 
justifying  righteousness,  the  righteousness  of  faith,  so  often 
called  the  righteousness  of  God.  Calvin  and  many  others 
take  it  in  the  former  sense  here,  and  understand  by  the  "  ar- 
mour of  righteousness,"  that  armour  which  integrity  affords,  or 
those  arms  which  are  consistent  with  moral  rectitude.  Others 
prefer  the  latter  sense  of  the  word,  and  understand  the  armour 
of  righteousness  to  be  that  which  is  secured  by  our  justifica- 
tion before  God.  This  iuterpretation  is  not  only  more  in 
keeping  with  Paul's  usage  of  the  word,  but  more  consistent 
-with  the  context.  It  was  not  Paul's  honesty  which  was  his 
armour,  or  by  which  he  established  his  claim  to  be  a  minister 
of  God,  but  the  supernatural  gifts  and  graces  of  the  Spirit. 
In  Eph.  6,  14,  he  compares  this  righteousness  to  a  breast- 
plate ;  here  to  the  whole  panoply,  on  the  right  hand  and  on 
the  left^  offensive  and  defensive,  because  he  who  is  justified,  or 
clothed  mth  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  has  every  tiling  at 
comm.and.  He  has  the  shield  of  faith,  and  the  helmet  of  sal- 
vation, and  the  svv  ord  of  the  Spirit. 

8-10.  By  honour  and  dishonour,  by  evil  report 
and  good  report ;  as  deceivers,  and  (yet)  true ;  as  un- 
known, and  (yet)  well  known ;  as  dying,  and  behold, 
we  live;  as  chastened,  and  not  killed;  as  sorrowful, 
yet  always  rejoicing ;  as  poor,  yet  making  many  rich ; 
as  having  nothing,  and  (yet)  possessing  all  things. 

These  verses  are  intimately  connected,  forming  a  distinct 
division  of  the  apostle's  discourse.  In  vs.  4.  5,  we  had  the 
preposition  Iv  in  its  local  sense.  Paul  commended  himself  by 
patience  m  afflictions,  in  necessities,  &c.  In  vs.  6.  7  the  same 
preposition  is  used  in  its  instrumental  sense,  hy  pureness,  by 
knowledge,  &c.  Here  the  prej^osition  Sta  has  a  local  sense, 
through^  in  the  midst  of.  He  maintained  his  consistency  and 
integrity  under  all  circumstances,  through  honour  and  dishon- 
our, through  evil  report  and  good  report.  He  was  always 
the  same — preached  the  same  doctrine,  urged  the  same  duties, 
maintained  the  same  principles,  whether  his  preaching  was 
approved  or  disapproved,  wliether  it  secured  for  him  admira- 
tion or  brought  down  upon  him  reproach.  This  is  the  com- 
mon and  most  natural  interpretation.     Many,  however,  prefer 


162  II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  8-10. 

the  instrumental  sense  of  the  preposition.  '  By  means  of 
honour  which  we  receive  from  the  friends  of  God,  and  by 
means  of  the  dishonour  heaped  upon  us  by  our  enemies.' 
That  the  good  honoured  him,  and  the  wicked  defamed  him, 
was  proof  of  his  integrity.  This  requires  too  much  to  be  sup- 
phed  in  order  to  bring  out  the  sense.  The  former  interpreta- 
tion is  more  simple,  and  gives  a  meaning  quite  as  pertinent. 
The  figure  which  he  uses  is  that  of  a  road,  along  which  he 
marches  to  victory,  through  all  obstacles,  disregarding  what 
is  said  or  thought  by  others.  This  last  clause  serves  as  the 
transition  to  a  new  mode  of  representation.  He  no  longer 
speaks  of  what  he  did,  but  of  the  judgment  of  others  concern- 
ing him.  As  deceivers^  and  yet  true.  These  and  the  follow- 
ing adjectives  and  participles,  as  they  are  in  Greek,  though 
translated  in  some  cases  as  substantives,  are  parallel  with 
avvicTTZivr^^  in  V.  4.  '  We  beseech  you,  commending  ourselves, 
<fec.,  and  we  beseech  you,  as  deceivers^  yet  true.,  &c.'  That  is, 
we  go  steadily  on  in  the  discharge  of  our  duty  whatever  men 
may  think  or  say.  As  deceivers^  (TrAavot,)  not  merely  false 
pretenders,  but  seducers,  men  who  lead  others  astray,  and 
themselves  wander  from  the  truth.  Matt.  27,  63.  1  Tim.  4,  1. 
2  John  7.  It  is  here  the  opposite  of  dX-^^ets,  in  the  sense  of 
truthful^  loving  and  speaking  the  truth.  Matt.  22,.  16.  Mark 
12,  14.  'Regarded  as  seducers,  we  are  the  advocates  of  the 
truth.'  As  unknown.,  yet  icell  hnown.,  (ws  dyvojv/xei/ot,  koX  e/rtyi- 
i/ooo-Ko/xcvot,)  regarded  with  contempt  as  obscure  and  ignoble, 
yet  recognised  and  famous.  The  antithesis  is  either  that  ex- 
pressed in  our  veision,  between  being  unknown  and  being 
well  known,  or,  between  being  misunderstood  and  being  duly 
appreciated.  The  latter  of  the  two  words  used  by  the  apostle 
may  well  express  that  sense,  as  eTrtytvoLxr/cw  often  means  to 
recognize,  or  acknowledge  one  to  be  what  he  is,  or  professes 
to  be,  1,  13.  14.  Matt.  17,  12,  and  although  the  former  Avord 
does  not  elsewhere  occur  precisely  in  the  sense  of  being  mis- 
understood, yet  to  be  unknown  and  to  be  unrecognized  are 
ideas  so  nearly  related,  that  it  is  not  unnatural  to  take  the 
word  in  that  sense  here,  if  the  antithesis  and  context  i-equiro 
it.  Paul  was  unknown  to  the  mass  of  the  people ;  he  was 
taken  to  be  what  he  was  not ;  and  yet  he  was  duly  appreciat- 
"id,  and  recognized  in  his  true  character  by  others.  As  dy^ 
ing^  i.  e.  regarded  by  others  as  certain  to  i)erish,  and  behold 
we  live.  This  is  one  interpretation.  It  is,  however,  more  in 
barmony  with  what  follows  to  understand  the  apostle  to  refei 


II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  8-10.  163 

to  actual  fac.ts.  He  was,  as  he  says,  4,  11  and  1  Cor.  15,  31, 
coustantly  exposed  to  death.  He  died  daily,  and  yet  he  lived. 
God  always  interposed  to  rescue  hira  from  destruction  when 
it  seemed  inevitable,  and  to  sustain  him  under  calamities 
which  to  all  appearance  no  man  could  bear.  As  chastened^ 
but  7iot  killed.  To  chasten  (-TratScveiv)  is  properly  to  treat  as  a 
child,  and  as  children  are  often  made  to  suffer  by  their  pa- 
rents for  their  good,  to  chasten  is  to  correct  by  suffering. 
The  word,  however,  is  often  used  to  express  simply  the  idea 
of  infliction  of  pain  without  any  reference  to  the  end  of  the 
infliction.  God  never  punishes  his  people.  That  is,  their  suf 
ferings  are  never  designed  to  satisfy  justice;  nor  are  they 
always  even  chastisements  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word. 
They  are  not  in  all  cases  sent  to  correct  evils,  to  repress  pride, 
or  to  wean  from  the  world.  God  often  afflicts  his  people  and 
his  church  simply  to  enable  them  the  better  to  glorify  his 
name.  It  is  an  unchristian  disposition,  therefore,  which  leads 
us  always  to  ask,  when  afflictions  are  sent  upon  ourselves  or 
others,  Why  is  this  ?  What  have  we  or  they  done  to  call 
forth  this  expression  of  parental  displeasure  or  solicitude? 
What  does  God  mean  to  rebuke  ?  It  may  be  that  our  suffer- 
ings are  chastisements,  that  is,  that  they  are  designed  to  cor- 
rect some  evil  of  the  heart  or  life,  but  this  is  not  to  be  inferred 
from  the  simple  fact  that  they  are  sufferings.  The  greater 
part  of  Paul's  sufferings  were  not  chastisements.  They  were 
designed  simply  to  show  to  all  ages  the  power  of  the  grace  of 
God ;  to  let  men  see  what  a  man  could  cheerfully  endure,  and 
rejoice  that  he  was  called  upon  to  endure,  for  the  sake  of  the 
Lord  Jesus.  In  this  case  chastened  means  simply  afflicted. 
There  is  no  reference  to  the  design  of  God  in  sending  the  suf- 
ferings which  the  apostle  was  called  to  endure.  There  is  an- 
other view  of  the  meaning  of  this  passage,  which  supposes  the 
words  to  be  uttered  from  the  stand-point  of  Paul's  enemies. 
"  Chastised,  but  not  killed."  '  Regarded  as  an  object  of  di- 
vine displeasure,  as  smitten  of  God,  (which  may  be  true,)  yet 
I  am  not  killed.'  It  is,  however,  more  in  keeping  with  what 
follows  to  understand  the  apostle  as  referring  to  his  actual  ex- 
perience. He  was  greatly  afflicted,  but  not  killed  ;  cast  down, 
.is  he  says  in  4,  9,  but  not  destroyed.  Compare  Ps.  118,  18, 
"  The  Lord  hath  chastened  me  sore ;  but  he  hath  not  deliv- 
ered me  over  unto  death."  Let  believers  therefore  regard 
their  afllictions,  w^hen  they  can,  not  as  indications  of  God's 
disapprobation,  but  rejoice  in  them  as  opportunities  graciously 


164  II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  11. 

aiForded  them  to  glorify  his  name.  As  sorroio/id,  yet  ahoays 
rejoicing.  This  again  may  mean,  'Looked  upon  as  sorrowful, 
yet  in  fact  always  rejoicing;'  or,  'Although  overwhelmed 
with  sorrow,  yet  full  of  joy.'  The  latter  interpretation  is  to 
be  preferred.  This  is  one  of  the  paradoxes  of  Christian  expe- 
rience. The  believer  has  more  true  joy  in  sorrow,  than  the 
Avorld  can  ever  afford.  The  sense  of  the  love  of  God,  assur- 
ance of  his  support,  confidence  in  future  blessedness,  and  the 
persuasion  that  his  present  hght  afflictions  shall  work  out  f6r 
him  a  far  more  exceeding  and  an  eternal  weight  of  glory, 
mingle  wdth  his  sorrows,  and  give  the  suffering  child  of  God 
a  peace  which  passes  all  understanding.  He  would  not  ex- 
change his  lot  with  that  of  the  most  prosperous  of  the  children 
of  this  world.  As  j^oor^  yet  making  many  rich.  Poor  in  this 
world's  goods,  yet  imparting  to  many  the  true  riches ;  as  hav- 
ing nothing.,  i.  e.  of  earthly  treasure,  yet  possessinrj  all  things., 
in  the  sense  in  which  in  1  Cor.  3,  21,  he  tells  the  Corinthians, 
"  All  things  are  yours."  The  real  property  in  any  thing  vests 
in  him  for  whose  benefit  it  is  held  and  used.  And  as  all 
things,  whether  the  world,  or  life  or  death,  or  things  present 
or  things  to  come,  are  held  and  disposed  by  God  for  the  bene- 
fit of  his  people,  for  their  present  good  and  future  glory,  they 
are  the  real  proprietors  of  all  things.  Being  joint  heirs  with 
Christ,  Rom.  8,  1 7,  they  possess  all  things. 

11.  O  (ye)  Corinthians,  our  mouth  is  open  unto 
you,  our  heart  is  enlarged. 

This  and  the  two  following  verses  are  an  epilogue  to  the 
preceding  vindication  of  himself,  and  an  introduction  to  the 
following  exhortations.  0  Corinthians.  This  direct  address 
is  unusual  with  the  apostle,  and  is  expressive  of  strong  feeling. 
Gal.  3,  1.  Our  mouth  is  open  (dvewye,  2  perfect,  as  present 
and  intransitive,  see  John  1,  52.)  To  open  the  mouth  is  a 
common  scriptural  expression,  meaning  to  begin  to  speak,  or, 
to  speak,  as  in  Matt.  5,  2.  Acts  8,  32.  35.  Here,  as  the  con- 
text shows,  it  is  used  emphatically,  and  means,  to  speak  freely 
and  o[)enly.  Compare  Eph.  6,  19.  Our  heart  is  enlarged. 
See  1  Kings  4,  29.  Fs.  119,  82.  Is.  60,  5.  Any  joyful,  gener- 
ous feeling  is  said  to  enlarge  the  heart.  A  large-hearted  man 
is  one  of  generous  and  warm  affections.  The  apostle  had 
poured  out  his  heart  to  the  Corinthians.  He  has  spoken  with 
the  utmost  freedom  and  openness,  and  in  doing  so  liis  heart 


II.   CORINTHIAXS   6,  12-14.  165 

wag  expanded  towards  them.     He  was  ready  to  embrace  them 
all,  and  to  take  them  to  his  arms  as  his  dear  children. 

12.  Ye  are  not  straitened  in  us,  but  ye  are  strait- 
ened in  your  own  bowels. 

The  apostle  abides  by  his  figure.  A  large  heart  ^  one 
expanded  by  love ;  a  straitened  heart  is  one  void  of  generoue 
affections.  To  be  straitened  (cn/evoxojpcw)  is  to  want  room; 
<TT€vox<jipia  is  want  of  room,  straits,  distress,  anguish  of  mind. 
Hence  to  enlarge,  to  give  one  a  wide  place,  is  to  deliver,  to 
bless.  Ps.  4,  1.  118,  5.  Ye  are  7iot  straitened  in  us^  i.  e. 
there  is  no  lack  of  room  for  you  in  our  heart ;  hut  ye  are 
straitened  in  your  own  bowels^  i.  e.  your  heart  is  too  narrow 
to  admit  me.  Straitened  in  your  own  howels^  means,  not  that 
you  are  inwardly  afflicted,  or  that  the  cause  of  your  trouble 
Ls  in  yourselves,  but,  as  the  context  requires,  '  Your  bowels 
(hearts)  are  narrow  or  contracted.'  There  is  not  room  in 
them  to  receive  rae.  Without  a  figure  the  meaning  is,  '  The 
want  of  love  is  on  your  side,  not  on  mine.' 

13.  Now  for  a  recompense  in  the  same,  (I  speak  as 
unto  (my)  children,)  be  ye  also  enlarged. 

The  exhortation  or  request  is,  '  Be  ye  also  enlarged,  i.  e. 
open  your  hearts  to  receive  me,  which  is  only  a  proper  recom- 
pense for  my  love  to  you.  I  speak  as  to  children,  who  are 
expected  to  requite  the  love  of  their  parents  with  filial  affec- 
tion.' The  words  rr]v  hk  avTrjv  dvTt/xio-^tW  are  explained  as  a 
concise  expression  for  to  8e  dvro,  6  eorti/  dvTt/xtcr-^ia,  '  as  to  the 
same  thing,  which  is  a  recompense,  be  ye  also  enlarged.'  The 
accusative  is  the  accusative  absolute. 

14.  Be  ye  not  unequally  yoked  together  with  un- 
believers :  for  what  fellowship  hath  righteousness  with 
unrighteousness  ?  and  what  communion  hath  light 
with  darkness  ? 

After  the  exhortation  to  requite  his  love  by  loving  him,  he 
exhorts  them  to  keep  aloof  from  all  intimate  association  with 
the  evil.  The  exhortation  is  general,  and  is  not  to  be  confined 
to  partaking  of  heathen  sacrifices,  nor  to  intermarriage  with 


166  II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  14. 

the  heathen,  much  less  to  association  with  the  opponents  cf 
tlie  apostle.  It  no  doubt  had  a  special  reference  or  a])plica- 
tion  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  Corinthians,  and  was 
intended  to  guard  them  against  those  entangling  and  danger- 
ous associations  with  the  unconverted  around  them,  to  which 
they  were  specially  exposed.  And  as  we  know  that  their 
special  danger  was  from  idolaters,  (see  1  Cor.  ch.  8,  and  10, 
14-33,)  whose  festivals  they  were  constantly  urged  to  attend, 
it  is  to  be  presumed  that  it  was  from  all  association  with  the 
heathen  in  their  worship  that  the  apostle  intended  to  warn 
them.  But  this  is  only  one  application  of  the  principle  here 
laid  down,  viz.,  that  intimate  associations  ought  not  to  be 
formed  by  the  people  of  God  with  those  iriio  are  not  his  peo- 
ple. The  same  remark  may  be  made  in  reference  to  the  per- 
sons here  intended  by  unbelievers.  It  is  no  doubt  true  that 
\>Y  unbelievers  [ol  dTrto-Tot)  Paul  meant  the  heathen.  (See  1 
Cor.  6,  6.)  But  it  does  not  follow  from  this  that  intimate  as- 
sociation with  the  heathen  is  all  that  is  here  forbidden.  The 
pi-inciple  applies  to  all  the  enemies  of  God  and  children  of 
darkness.  It  is  intimate,  voluntary  association  M'ith  the 
kicked  that  is  forbidden.  The  woise  a  man  is,  the  more 
openly  he  is  opposed  to  Christ  and  his  gospel,  the  greater  the 
danger  and  evil  of  connection  with  him.  It  is  not  so  much 
his  profession  as  his  real  character  and  influence  that  is  to  be 
taken  into  account.  If  it  be  asked  whether  the  marriage  of 
professors  of  religion  with  non-professors,  in  the  modern  (or 
American)  sense  of  those  terms,  is  here  expressly  prohibited? 
The  answer  must  be  in  the  negative.  There  were  no  such 
classes  of  persons  in  the  apostolic  age,  as  professing  and  non- 
professing  Christians.  The  distinction  was  then  between 
Christians  and  heathens.  Persons  born  within  the  pale  of  the 
Christian  Church,  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and  relig- 
iously educated,  do  not  belong  to  the  same  category  as  the 
heathen.  And  the  principle  which  applied  to  the  latter  there- 
fore does  not  apply  to  the  former.  Still  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  it  is  the  union  of  incongruous  elements,  of  the 
devout  and  undevout,  of  the  spiritual  and  the  worldly,  of  tlie 
good  and  the  evil,  of  the  children  of  God  and  the  children  of 
the  evil  one,  that  the  apostle  exhorts  Christians  to  avoid,  l^e 
lot  unequally  yoked.  The  word  is  ercpo^vyew,  to  he  yoked 
heterogeneoiisly^  i.  e.  with  an  animal  of  another  kind.  The 
allusion  \s  evidently  to  the  Mosaic  law  which  forbade  the 
uniting  animals  of  different  kinds  in  the  same  yoke.  D.eut.  22, 


II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  14.  167 

10.  In  Lev.  19,  19,  ercpo^vyos,  in  the  Septuagint,  means  an 
animal  of  a  different  kind.  It  is  the  union  of  incongruous,  un- 
congenial elements  or  persons  that  is  forbidden.  With  unbe- 
lievers j  as  the  dative,  aTTLo-Tots,  cannot  depend  on  the  preced- 
ing word,  it  is  explained  by  resolving  the  concise  phrase  of 
the  apostle  into  the  full  form,  /xr]  yivca-^e  iT€pot,vy.  /cat  ovroi^  ofXL' 
lvyovvTe<;  aTTLcrTOLs.  Winer,  p.  252.  By  unbelievers,  as  above 
remarked,  are  to  be  understood  the  heathen,  those  who  did 
not  profess  faith  in  the  gospel.  The  exhortation  is  enforced 
by  the  following  questions,  which  are  designed  to  show  the 
incongruity  of  such  unions.  jPor  what  fellowship  hath  right^ 
eousness  with  unrighteousness  ?  This  is  stronger  than  asking, 
What  fellowship  have  the  righteous  with  the  unrighteous  ? 
because  there  are  many  bonds  of  sympathy  between  good  and 
bad  men,  arising  from  the  participation  of  a  common  nature, 
and  from  the  fact  that  in  this  life,  the  good  are  not  wholly 
good,  nor  the  bad  wholly  bad.  The  apostle,  therefore,  con- 
trasts the  characteristic  and  opposing  principles  by  which  the 
two  classes  are  distinguished.  By  righteousness  as  opposed 
to  unrighteousness,  {hiKo^ioavvt]  to  dvo/xta,)  is  meant  goodness, 
or  moral  excellence  in  general,  conformity  to  the  law  of  God 
as  opposed  to  opposition  to  that  law.  It  does  not  mean  justi- 
fying righteousness,  as  though  the  contrast  were,  as  some 
explain  it,  between  the  justified  and  the  not  justified.  The 
opposition  intended  is  that  which  exists  between  the  righteous 
and  the  wicked.  What  fellowship^  (jaerox^/,)  partnership.  That 
is,  what  have  they  in  common  ?  What  bond  of  union  or  sym- 
pathy is  there  between  them?  And  what  coinmunion  (/cot- 
vojvta),  see  Acts  2,  42.  1  Cor.  1,  9.  10,  16.  Parties  are  said  to 
be  in  communion  when  they  are  so  united  that  what  belongs 
to  the  one  belongs  to  the  other,  or  when  what  is  true  of  the 
one  is  true  of  the  other.  Believers  are  in  communion,  or  have 
fellowship  one  with  another,  when  they  recognize  each  other 
as  having  a  joint  interest  in  the  benefits  of  redemption,  and 
are  conscious  that  the  inward  experience  of  the  one  is  that  of 
the  other.  Incongruous  elements  cannot  be  thus  united,  and 
any  attempt  to  combine  them  must  destroy  the  character  of 
one  or  the  other.  Hath  light  xoith  darkness.  Light  is  the 
common  scriptural  emblem  of  knowledge,  holiness  and  blessed- 
ness. Hence  Christians  are  said  to  be  the  children  of  light. 
Luke  16,  8.  1  Thess.  5,  5.  Paul  was  sent  "to  turn  men  from 
darkness  to  light,"  Acts  26,  18.  Rom.  13,  12.  Eph.  5,  8.  9. 
Darkness^  on  the  ot iier  hand,  is  the  emblem  of  error,  sin  and 
8 


168  II.    COIIIXTHIAXS    6,  15. 

misery.  Satan's  kingdom  is  called  the  kingdom  of  darkness, 
and  the  wicked  are  the  children  of  darkness ;  and  the  state  of 
final  perdition  is  "outer  darkness."  Nothing  can  he  more  in 
congruous  than  light  and  darkness,  whether  in  the  literal  or 
figurative  meaning  of  the  terms.  The  attempt,  therefore,  of 
Christians  to  remain  Christians  and  retain  their  inward  state 
as  such,  and  yet  to  enter  voluntarily  into  intimate  fellowship 
with  the  world,  is  as  impossible  as  to  combine  light  aLd  dark- 
ness, holiness  and  sin,  happiness  and  misery. 

15.  And  what  concord  hath  Christ  with  Behal? 
or  what  part  hath  he  that  beheveth  with  an  infidel  ? 

What  concord,  (orv/x^tovT^o-is,)  "  harmony  of  voice."  How 
discordant  or  opposite  are  Christ  and  Belial  ?  How  then  can 
their  followers  agree  ?  The  proper  orthography  of  the  word 
according  to  the  Hebrew  is  Belial,  as  here  in  the  received 
text.  Many  MSS.  read  Beliar,  (agreeably  to  a  common 
change  of  the  1  for  r  by  the  Jews  who  spoke  Greek,)  others 
Beliam.  The  word  is  properly  an  abstract  noun  signifying 
worthlessnesSy  then  wickedness.  Hence  the  wicked  are  called 
"  sons  of  Belial,"  i.  e.  worthless.  It  is  used  as  a  concrete  noun 
in  2  Sam.  23,  6.  Job  34,18.  "Wicked  one,"  and  hence,  by 
way  of  eminence,  for  Satan,  who  is  6  7rovr}p6<;,  the  evil  one. 
Compare  1  Cor.  10,  21,  where  the  impossibility  of  uniting  the 
service  of  Christ  and  the  service  of  Satan  is  presented  in  much 
the  same  terms  as  it  is  here.  Christ  is  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh ;  Satan  is  the  prince  of  darkness.  How  can  they,  or  their 
followers  agree  ?  Or  what  part  (/u-epts,  in  the  sense  oi partici- 
pation.^ fellowship.  Col.  1,  12)  hath  he  that  believeth  with  an 
infidel.  In  modern  usage  an  unbeliever  often  means  one  des- 
titute of  saving  faith ;  and  an  infidel  one  destitute  even  of 
speculative  faith,  one  who  denies  the  gospel  to  be  a  revelation 
from  God.  This  is  a  distinction  unknown  to  the  Bible.  The 
word  here  rendered  infidel  is  in  v.  14  rendered  unbeliever. 
In  the  apostoHc  age  all  who  professed  faith  of  any  kind  were 
called  believers,  and  unbelievers  were  infidels.  It  was  as- 
sumed that  the  faith  possessed  was  genuine ;  and  therefore  it 
was  assumed  that  all  believers  were  truly  the  children  of  God. 
A  mere  speculative  believer  and  an  infidel  may  agree  well 
enough  in  their  tastes,  character  and  pursuits.  There  is  no 
Buch  incompatibility  or  antipathy  between  them,  as  the  apos- 
tle assumes  to  exist  between  the  (Trtoro?  and  dTrioTos)  believer 


II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  16.  169 

and  unbeliever.  It  is  taken  for  granted  that  foith  changes  the 
whole  character;  that  it  makes  a  man  move  in  an  entirely 
different  sphere,  having  different  feelings,  objects,  and  princi- 
ples from  those  of  unbelievers ;  so  that  intimate  union,  com- 
munion or  sympathy  between  believers  and  unbelievers  is  as 
impossible  as  fellowship  between  light  and  darkness,  Christ 
and  Belial.  And  it  must  be  so.  They  may  indeed  have  many 
things  in  common ;  a  common  country,  common  kindred,  com- 
mon worldly  avocations,  common  natural  affections,  but  the 
interior  life  is  entirely  different ;  not  only  incongruous,  but 
essentially  opposed  the  one  to  the  other.  To  the  one,  Christ 
is  God,  the  object  of  supreme  reverence  and  love  ;  to  the  oth- 
er, he  is  a  mere  man.  To  the  one,  the  great  object  of  life  is  to 
promote  the  glory  of  Christ  and  to  secure  his  favour ;  to  the 
other,  these  are  objects  of  indifference.  Elements  so  discord- 
ant can  never  be  united  into  a  harmonious  whole. 

16.  And  what  agreement  hath  the  temple  of  God 
with  idols  ?  for  ye  are  the  temple  of  the  living  God ; 
as  God  hath  said,  I  will  dwell  in  them,  and  walk  in 
(them) ;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my 
people. 

In  this  and  the  following  verses  we  have,  1 .  The  assertion 
of  the  incongruity  between  the  temple  of  God  and  idols. 
2.  The  reason  assigned  for  presenting  this  incongruity,  '  For 
ye  are  the  temple  of  God.'  3.  The  proof  from  Scripture  that 
believers  are  God's  temple.  4.  The  duty  which  flows  from 
this  intimate  relation  to  God;  and  5.  The  gracious  promise 
made  to  all  those  who  live  in  accordance  with  the  relation 
which  they  bear  to  God.  What  agreement  (crvyKara^eo-i?,  see 
Luke  23,  51,)  hath  the  temple  of  God  icith  idols  f  A  building 
consecrated  to  the  true  God  is  no  place  for  idols.  Men  can- 
not combine  the  worship  of  God  and  the  worship  of  devils. 
Idolatry  is  everywhere  in  Scripture  represented  as  the  great- 
est insult  the  creature  can  offer  the  Creator ;  and  the  grossest 
form  of  that  insult  is  to  erect  idols  in  God's  own  temple. 
Such  was  the  indignity  which  those  Corinthians  offered  to 
God,  who,  while  professing  to  be  Christians,  joined  in  the  re- 
ligious services  of  the  heathen.  And  such,  in  its  measure,  is 
the  offence  committed  when  the  people  of  God  become  associ- 
ated with  the  wicked  in  their  inward  and  outward  life.     It  is 


170  II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  16. 

the  introduction  of  idols  into  God's  temple.  For  ye  are  the 
temple  of  the  living  God.  There  would  be  no  pi'opriety  in 
the  preceding  illustration  if  believers  were  not  God's  temple, 
riiis,  therefore,  the  apostle  first  asserts  and  then  proves.  The 
tQxX  is  here  uncertain.  The  majority  of  MSS.  read  with  the 
common  text,  v/^tet?,  ye;  Lachmann,  Meyer  and  some  other 
editors,  on  the  authority  of  a  few  MSS.  and  of  the  context, 
read  i^/xct?,  we.  The  sense  is  substantially  the  same.  The 
common  text  is  to  be  preferred  both  on  external  and  internal 
grounds.  The  apostle  is  addressing  the  Corinthians,  and  prop- 
erly therefore  says.  Ye  are  the  temple  of  God.  A  temple  is 
not  a  building  simply  consecrated  to  God,  but  one  in  which 
he  dwells,  as  he  dwelt  by  the  visible  manifestation  of  his  glory 
in  the  temple  of  old.  Hence  heaven,  as  God's  dwelling  place, 
is  called  his  temple.  Ps.  11,  2.  Habak.  2,  20.  Christ's  body 
is  called  a  temple,  because  in  him  dwelt  the  fulness  of  the 
Godhead.  John  2,  19.  Believers  colle(;tively,  or  the  church, 
is  God's  temple,  because  inhabited  by  his  Spirit,  Eph.  2,  21, 
and  for  the  same  reason  every  individual  believer,  and  every 
believer's  body  is  a  temple  of  God.  1  Cor.  3,  16.  6,  19.  To 
prove  that  they  were  the  temple  of  God,  individually  and  col- 
lectively, he  therefore  cites  the  declaration  of  the  Scriptures 
that  God  dwells  in  his  people.  "I  will  dwell  in  them  and 
walk  in  them."  God  is  said  to  dwell  wherever  he  spet-ially 
and  permanently  manifests  his  presence.  And  since  he  thus 
specially  and  permanently  manifests  his  presence  in  his  people 
collectively  and  individually,  he  is  said  to  dwell  in  all  and  in 
each.  To  loalk  in  them  is  simply  a  parallelism  with  the  pre- 
ceding clause,  expressing  the  idea  of  the  divine  presence  in 
another  form.  The  nearest  approach  to  the  words  here  cited 
is  Lev.  2G,  11.  12,  where  the  same  thought  is  expressed,  though 
in  somewhat  diiferent  words.  Instead  of,  "I  will  set  my 
tabernacle  among  you,"  the  apostle  expresses  the  same  idea 
by  saying,  "I  will  dwell  in  them."  In  them..,  is  not  simply 
among  tliem,  because  the  presence  of  God  by  his  Spirit  is  al- 
ways represented  as  internal,  in  the  heart.  "  If  Christ  be  in 
you,"  says  the  apostle,  "the  body  is  dead,  <fcc."  "If  the 
Spirit  of  Him  who  raised  Christ  from  the  dead  dwell  in  you, 
tfcc."  Rom.  8,  10.11.  So  of  every  believer  our  Lord  says, 
"  If  a  man  love  me,  lie  will  keep  my  words,  and  my  Father 
will  love  him ;  and  we  will  come  unto  him,  and  make  our 
abode  with  him,"  John  14,  23.  Every  thing  is  full  of  God. 
An  insect,  a  flower,  is  a  constant  manifestation  of  his  presence 


II.   CORINTHIANS  6,  17.  Ill 

and  power.  It  is  what  it  is  because  God  is  in  it.  So  of  the 
human  soul,  it  is  said  to  be  full  of  God  when  its  inward  state, 
its  affections  and  acts,  are  determined  and  controlled  by  him, 
so  as  to  be  a  constant  manifestation  of  the  divine  presence. 
Then  the  soul  is  pure,  and  gloiious,  and  free,  and  blessed. 
This  is  what  God  promises  to  accomplish  in  us,  when  he  says, 
"  I  will  dwell  in  you  and  walk  in  you."  It  is  only  a  variation 
of  form  whem  it  is  added,  I  icill  he  their  God^  and  they  shaU 
he  my  people.  This  is  the  great  promise  of  the  covenant  with 
Abraham  and  with  all  the  true  Israel.  It  is  one  of  the  most 
comprehensive  and  frequently  repeated  promises  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Gen.  17,  8.  Deut.  29,  13.  Jerem.  31,  33.  Heb.  8,  10, 
&c.,  &c.  There  is  unspeakably  more  in  the  promises  of  God 
than  we  are  able  to  understand.  The  promise  that  the  na- 
tions should  be  blessed  in  the  seed  of  Abraham,  as  unfolded  in 
the  New  Testament,  is  found  to  comprehend  all  the  blessings 
of  redemption.  So  the  promise,  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they 
shall  be  my  people,  contains  more  than  it  has  ever  entered 
into  the  heart  of  man  to  conceive.  How  low  are  our  concep- 
tions of  God !  Of  necessity  our  conceptions  of  what  it  is  to 
have  a  God,  and  that  God,  Jehovah,  must  be  entirely  inade- 
quate. It  is  not  only  to  have  an  infinite  protector  and  bene- 
factor, but  an  infinite  portion ;  an  infinite  object  of  love  and 
confidence  ;  an  infinite  source  of  knowledge  and  holiness.  It 
is  for  God  to  be  to  us  Avhat  he  desiccned  to  be  when  he  created 
us  after  his  image,  and  filled  us  with  his  fulness.  His  people, 
are  those  whom  he  recognizes  as  his  peculiar  property,  the 
objects  of  his  love,  and  the  recipients  of  his  favours. 

17.  Wherefore  come  out  from  among  them,  and 
be  ye  separate,  saith  the  Lord,  and  touch  not  the  un- 
clean (thing) ;  and  I  will  receive  you. 

This  is  a  free  citation  from  Is.  52,  11.  12,  where  the  same 
exhortation  to  separate  themselves  from  the  wicked,  and  spe- 
cially from  the  heathen,  is  addressed  to  the  people  of  God. 
The  words  and  I  will  receive  you  have  nothing  to  answer  to 
them  in  the  passage  in  Isaiah,  unless  it  be  the  words  "  God 
shall  be  your  rere-ward  ;"  literally,  "he  that  gathereth  you." 
In  Judges  19,  18  the  same  word  is  rendered  to  receive^ 
"  There  is  no  one  receiveth  me  to  house."  It  is  more  proba- 
ble, however,  that  they  are  borrowed  from  Ezekiel  20,  34,  aa 


172  II.   CORINTHIANS   6,  18. 

it  is  rendered  in  the  Septuagint.  The  exhortation  is  founded 
on  the  preceding  passage.  God  is  most  intimately  related  to 
his  people.  They  are  his  temple.  He  dwells  in  them.  There- 
fore they  are  bound  to  keep  themselves  unspotted  from  the 
world.  Their  being  God's  temple,  his  presence  in  them,  and 
his  regarding  them  as  his  people,  depends  upon  their  separa- 
tion from  the  world.  For  if  any  man  love  the  world,  the  love 
of  the  Father  is  not  in  him.  1  John  2,  15.  In  this  whole  con- 
text the  apostle  clothes  his  own  exhortation  to  the  Corinthians 
in  the  language  of  God  himself  j  that  they  might  see  that  what 
he  taught  was  indeed  the  word  of  God. 

18.  And  mil  be  a  leather  unto  you,  and  ye  shall 
be  my  sons  and  daughters,  saith  the  Lord  Almighty. 

This  is  a  continuation  of  the  promise  commenced  in  the 
preceding  verse.  God  declares  that  he  will  not  only  receive 
into  his  favour  those  who  regard  themselves  as  his  temple  and 
keep  themselves  aloof  from  all  contaminating  associations  with 
the  wicked,  but  that  he  will  be  a  father  to  them.  It  is  not 
Avith  the  favour  of  a  master  to  a  servant  that  he  will  regard 
them,  but  with  the  favour  which  a  father  exercises  to  his  sons 
and  daughters.  This  is  the  language  of  the  Lord  Almighty; 
of  the  omnipotent  God.  To  be  his  sons  and  daughters  is  a 
dignity  and  blessedness  before  which  all  earthly  honours  and 
all  worldly  good  disappear.  It  is  doubtful  what  particular 
passage  of  the  Old  Testament  the  apostle  had  in  his  mind  in 
this  citation.  Some  think  it  was  2  Sam.  7,  14,  but  there 
God  merely  says  to  David  in  reference  to  his  promised  seed, 
"  I  will  be  his  father,  and  he  shall  be  my  son."  There  is 
too  little  similarity  in  form,  and  too  remote  an  analogy  of 
sentiment,  to  render  it  probable  that  that  passage  was  the 
one  i-eferred  to.  Is.  43,  6  is  more  in  point.  "  Bring  my 
sons  from  far,  and  my  daughters  from  the  ends  of  the  earth." 
Here  the  people  of  God  are  said  to  be  his  sons  and  daughters ; 
which  is  all  that  the  citation  of  the  apostle  asserts.  The  con- 
cluding verses  of  this  chapter  are  an  instructive  illustration  of 
the  way  in  which  the  New  Testament  writers  quote  the  Old. 
1.  They  often  quote  a  translation  which  does  not  strictly  ad- 
here to  the  original.  2.  They  often  quote  accordhig  to  the 
sense  and  not  according  to  the  letter.  3.  They  often  blend 
together  different  passages  of  Scripture,  so  as  to  give  the  sense 
not  of  any  one  passage,  but  the  combined  sense  of  several 


II.   CORINTHIANS   7.  173 

4.  They  sometimes  give  the  sense  not  of  any  particular  pas- 
sage or  passages,  but,  so  to  speak,  the  general  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture. That  is,  they  quote  the  Scriptures  as  saying  what  is  no- 
where found  in  so  many  words,  but  what  nevertheless  the 
Scriptures  clearly  teach.  There  is  no  such  passage,  for  exam- 
2jle,  as  that  contained  in  this  verse  in  the  Old  Testament,  but 
the  sentiment  is  often  and  clearly  therein  expressed.  5.  They 
never  quote  as  of  authority  any  but  the  canonical  books  of  the 
Old  Testament. 


CHAPTER   VH. 


An  exhortation  founded  on  what  is  said  in  the  preceding  chapter,  v.  1. 
Paul's  consolation  derived  from  the  favourable  account  which  he  had 
received  from  Corinth,  vs.  2-16. 

The  effect  produced  on  the  church  in  Corinth  by  the  apostWs 
former  letter,  and  his  consequent  satisfaction  and  joy. 

After  in  v.  1  exhorting  them  to  live  as  became  those  to 
whom  such  precious  promises  had  been  given  as  he  had  just 
recited  from  the  word  of  God,  he  in  vs.  2.  3  repeats  his  desire 
before  expressed,  6,  13,  that  they  would  reciprocate  his  ardent 
love.  So  far  as  he  was  concerned  there  was  nothing  in  the 
way  of  this  cordial  reconciliation.  He  had  not  injured  them, 
nor  was  he  alienated  from  them.  He  had  great  confidence  in 
them.  His  apprehensions  and  anxiety  had  been  in  a  great 
measure  removed  by  the  account  which  he  had  received  from 
Titus  of  the  feehngs  of  the  Corinthians  towards  him,  vs.  4-7. 
It  is  true  that  he  did  at  one  time  regret  having  written  that 
letter  respecting  the  incestuous  person ;  but  he  no  longer  re- 
gretted it,  because  he  found  that  the  sorrow  which  that  letter 
occasioned  was  the  sorrow  of  true  repentance,  redounding  not 
to  their  injury,  but  to  their  good,  vs.  8.  9.  It  was  not  the 
sorrow  of  the  world,  but  true  godly  sorrow,  as  was  evident 
from  its  effects,  vs.  10-12.  Therefore  the  apostle  was  com- 
forted, and  dehghted  to  find  how  much  Titus  had  been  grati- 
fied by  his  visit  to  Corinth.     All  that  the  apostle  had  told  him 


174  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  1. 

of  the  good  dispositions  of  the  Corinthians  had  pro"S'ed  to  ba 
true,  vs.  13-16. 

1 .  Having  therefore  these  promises,  dearly  beloved, 
let  us  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the  flesii 
and  spirit,  perfecting  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God. 

This  verse  properly  belongs  to  the  preceding  chapter.  It 
is  the  appropriate  conclusion  of  the  exposition  there  made. 
The  promises  referred  to  are,  1st.  Of  the  indwelling  of  God, 
6,  16.  2d.  Of  his  flwour,  v.  17.  3d.  That  they  should  be  his 
sons  and  daughters.  Therefore^  says  the  apostle,  having  these 
promises  of  intimate  association  Avith  God,  and  this  assurance 
of  his  love,  let  us  imrify  ourselves  j  i.  e.  not  merely  keep  our- 
selves pure  by  avoiding  contamination,  but,  as  already  defiled, 
let  us  strive  to  become  pure.  Though  the  work  of  puritica- 
tion  is  so  often  referred  to  God  as  its  author.  Acts  15,  9.  Eph. 
6,  26,  this  does  not  preclude  the  agency  of  his  people.  They 
are  to  work  out  their  own  salvation,  because  it  is  God  who 
worketh  in  them  both  to  will  and  to  do.  If  God's  agency  in 
sanctification  does  not  arouse  and  direct  ours ;  if  it  does  not 
create  tlie  desire  for  holiness,  and  strenuous  efforts  to  attain 
it,  we  may  be  sure  that  we  are  not  its  subjects.  He  is  leaving 
us  undisturbed  in  our  sins.  From  all  filthiness  of  the  flesh 
and  spirit.  All  sin  is  a  pollution.  There  are  two  classes  of 
sin  here  recognized  ;  those  of  the  flesh,  and  those  of  the  spirit. 
By  the  former  we  are  to  understand  those  sins  which  defile 
the  body,  as  drunkenness  and  debauchery ;  and  by  the  latter 
those  which  affect  only  the  soul,  as  ])ride  and  malice.  By 
filthiness  of  the  flesh,  therefore,  is  not  to  be  understood  mere 
ceremonial  uncleanness,  nor  the  participation  of  tlie  body  in 
sinful  acts,  such  as  bowing  down  to  an  idol,  or  offering  incense 
to  false  gods,  but  the  desecration  of  the  body  as  the  temple 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  See  1  Cor.  6,  19.  Perfecting  holi?icss. 
This  expresses  or  indicates  the  way  in  which  we  are  to  purify 
ourselves.  It  is  by  perfecting  holiness.  The  word  cTrtTcAeoj 
does  not  here  mean  simply  to  practise,  but  to  comi)lete,  to 
carry  on  to  perfection.  Comp.  8,  6. 11.  Phil.  1,  6.  it  is  only 
by  being  completely  or  perfectly  holy  that  we  can  attain  the 
purity  required  of  us  as  the  temples  of  God.  JIoli?iess  (ayta;- 
ctwt;,  Rom.  1,  3.  1  Thess.  3,  13)  includes  not  only  the  negative 
idea  of  purity,  or  freedom  from  all  defilement,  but  also,  posi- 
tively, that  of  moral  excellence.     In  the  fear  of  God,    This 


II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  2.  175 

la  the  motive  which  is  to  determine  our  endeavom's  to  purify 
ourselves.  It  is  not  regard  to  the  good  of  others,  nor  our  own 
nappiness,  but  reverence  for  God.  We  are  to  be  holy,  be- 
cause he  is  holy. 

2.  Receive  us  ;  we  have  wronged  no  man,  we  have 
corrupted  no  man,  we  have  defrauded  no  man. 

Meceive  us  /  literally,  maJce  room  for  us^  i.  e.  in  your  heart. 
It  is  a  repetition  or  resumj^tion  of  the  request,  "  Be  ye  also 
enlarged,"  contained  in  6,  13.  Then  follow  the  reasons,  at 
least  those  of  a  negative  kind,  why  they  should  thus  receive 
the  apostle.  We  have  loroyiged  no  man^  (•^SiKryo-a/xev,)  ice  have 
treated  no  one  unjustly.  The  expression  is  perfectly  general. 
It  may  refer  either  to  his  conduct  as  a  man,  or  to  the  exercise 
of  his  apostolical  authority.  There  is  nothing  to  limit  it,  or 
to  determine  the  kind  of  injustice  which  had  been  laid  to  his 
charge,  or  which  he  here  had  specially  in  view.  TFe  have  cor- 
rupted no  man.  The  word  (^^dpoi^  rendered  to  corrupt^  means 
to  injure  or  destroy,  either  in  a  moral  or  physical  sense.  It  is 
used  in  a  moral  sense,  11,  3.  1  Cor.  15,  33.  Eph.  4,  22,  and  in 
1  Cor.  3,  17,  it  is  used  first  in  the  one  sense  and  then  in  the 
other.  "  If  any  defile  the  temple  of  God,  him  shall  God  de- 
stroy." Which  sense  should  be  adopted  here  is  uncertain. 
Paul  may  mean  to  say  that  he  had  coi-i-upted  no  one's  morals 
by  his  example  or  arts  of  seduction ;  or  that  he  had  corrupted 
no  man's  faith  by  his  false  teaching ;  or  that  he  had  ruined  no 
man  as  to  his  estate.  The  only  reason  for  preferring  the  lat- 
ter interpretation  is  that  the  other  words  with  which  it  is  as- 
sociated express  external  injuries.  There  is  no  ground  for  the 
assumption  that  Paul  refers  to  his  former  letter  and  intends  to 
vindicate  himself  from  the  charge  of  injustice  or  undue  severi- 
ty in  his  treatment  of  the  incestuous  person.  That  matter  he 
has  not  yet  adverted  to ;  and  the  expressions  here  used  are 
too  general,  and  the  last  ("  we  have  defrauded  no  man  ")  is 
inapplicable  to  that  case.  By  defrauding  he  probably  means 
acting  unfairly  in  pecuniary  affairs.  The  word  TrAeovcKreco,  in 
the  Xew  Testament,  means  either  to  have  or  take  advan- 
tage of  any  one,  2,  11,  or,  to  make  gain  of  to  defraud.  The 
usage  of  the  word  and  of  its  cognates  is  in  favour  of  the 
latter  sense.  12,  17.  18.  1  Cor.  5,  10.  6,  10.  Paul  was  special- 
ly careful  to  avoid  all  occasion  of  suspicion  as  to  the  disposi- 
tion of  the  money  which  he  raised  from  the  churches  for  the 
8* 


176  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  3.4. 

relief  of  the  poor.  8,  19.  20,  and  no  doubt  his  enemies  were 
ready  enough  to  insinuate  that  he  appropriated  the  money  tc 
his  own  use.  He  had  therefore  occasion  to  show  that  he  had 
never  made  gain  of  them,  that  he  had  defrauded  no  man. 

3  I  speak  not  (this)  to  condemn  (you) :  for  I  have 
said  before,  that  ye  are  in  our  hearts  to  die  and  live 
with  (you). 

I  speak  not  this  to  condemn  you ;  i.  e.  In  defending  my- 
self I  do  not  mean  to  condemn  you.  This  may  mean  either, 
'  In  saying  that  I  have  wronged  no  man,  I  do  not  intend  to 
imply  that  you  have  wronged  me  ; '  or,  '  I  do  not  mean  to  im- 
ply that  you  think  of  me  so  unjustly  as  to  suppose  that  I  have 
wronged,  injured  or  defrauded  any  one.'  In  other  words,  'I 
do  not  mean  to  question  your  love.'  For.  What  follows  as- 
signs the  reason  or  proof  that  he  had  no  unkind  feeling  towards 
them  which  would  lead  him  to  condemn  them.  I  said  before^ 
viz.,  in  6,  12,  that  ye  are  in  our  hearts.  That  is,  that  I  love 
you.  He  had  said  that  his  heart  was  enlarged  towards  them, 
which  was  proof  enough  that  he  did  not  now  mean  to  upbraid 
them.  To  die  and  live  with  you.,  ek  to  o-waTro^aveLv  koL  a-vlrjv, 
so  as  to  die  and  live  together.  That  is,  '  Ye  are  so  rooted  in 
my  heart  that  I  would  gladly  hve  and  die  with  you,'  or,  '  so 
that  neither  death  nor  Ufe  can  separate  us.'  As  remarked 
above,  Paul's  love  for  the  Corinthians  seems  to  have  been  ex- 
traordinary, having  something  of  the  nature  of  a  passion,  be- 
ing more  ardent  than  either  their  good  qualities  or  their 
conduct  towards  him  could  account  for.  This  is  often  the 
case  in  men  of  warm  and  generous  feeling,  who  have  frequent- 
ly to  say,  '  The  more  abundantly  we  love,  the  less  we  are 
loved.' 


4.  Great  (is)  my  boldness  of  speech  toward  you, 
great  (is)  my  glorying  of  you :  I  am  filled  with  com- 
fort, I  am  exceeding  joyful  in  all  our  tribulation. 

So  far  from  having  any  disposition  to  upbraid  or  to  re 
criminate,  his  heart  was  overflowing  with  far  different  feelings. 
He  had  not  only  confidence  in  them,  he  was  proud  of  them ; 
he  was  not  only  comforted,  he  was  filled  with  exceeding  joy. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  4.  Ill 

There  is  a  climax  here,  as  Calvin  says:  Gradatirn  procedlt 
amplificando :  plus  enim  est  gloriari,  quam  securo  et  quieto 
esse  animo :  liberari  vero  a  moerore  ex  multis  afflictionibus 
concepto,  utroque  majus.  His  boasting  of  them  was  more 
than  having  confidence  in  them ;  and  his  rejoicing  in  tlie  midst 
of  his  afflictions  was  more  than  being  comforted.  Great  is 
77iy  boldness  of  speech  toicards  you.  The  word  is  Tra-pprja-ta^ 
which  here,  as  in  many  other  places,  Eph.  3,  12.  Heb.  3,  6. 
1  John  2,  28.  3,  21.  4,  IV.  5,  14,  instead  of  its  primary  sense 
of  freedom  of  speech,  expresses  the  idea  of  joyful  confidence ; 
i.  e.  the  state  of  mind  from  which  freedom  of  utterance,  or 
boldness  of  speech,  flows.  Paul  means  to  say  that  so  far  from 
wishing  to  condemn  the  Corinthians  he  had  joyful  confidence 
in  them.  And  not  only  that,  he  adds,  but,  Great  is  my  glo- 
rying of  you^  (Ka^xT/o-ts,)  i.  e.  my  boasting  over  you.  The  ac- 
counts which  the  apostle  had  just  received  of  the  state  of 
things  at  Corinth,  and  especially  of  the  effect  produced  by  his 
former  letter,  had  not  only  obliterated  his  feelings  of  anxiety 
and  doubt  concerning  them,  but  made  him  boast  of  them. 
He  gloried  on  their  account.  He  vras  disposed  to  tell  every 
one  how  w^ell  his  dear  Corinthians  had  behaved.  He  thus,  as 
it  were,  unconsciously  lays  bare  the  throbbings  of  his  warm 
and  generous  heart,  I  am  filled  with  comfort.,  literally, '  with 
the  comfort,'  i.  e.  the  comfort  to  which  he  afterwards  refers ; 
or  the  comfort  which  his  situation  specially  demanded.  Such 
was  the  apostle's  anxiety  about  the  effect  of  his  former  letter 
that,  as  he  says,  2,  12,  "he  had  no  rest  in  his  spirit,"  and 
therefore  left  Troas  and  hastened  into  Macedonia  that  he 
might  meet  Titus  on  his  way  back  from  Corinth.  This  anxie- 
ty was  now  all  gone.  His  mind  was  at  rest.  He  was  full  of 
consolation.  I  am  exceedingly  joyful.,  ({^TrcpTrepto-o-evo/xat  rfy 
XttpoL,)  I  more  than  abound  in  joy.,  or  the  joy.  Comp.  Rom. 
5,  20.  He  was  more  than  merely  comforted,  he  was  overflow- 
ing w-ith  joy,  and  that  too  in  spite  of  all  the  troubles  which 
still  pressed  upon  him,  for  he  adds,  in  cdl  our  tribulation. 
The  favourable  accounts  which  Paul  had  received  from  Cor- 
inth, although  they  had  removed  some  of  the  causes  of  his 
anxiety  and  suffering,  left  others  in  their  full  force.  So  that 
even  when  he  wrote  he  w^as  in  great  trouble.  He  therefore 
uses  the  present  tense.  'I  am  overflowing  with  joy  in  the 
midst  of  tribulation.'  Another  proof  that  joy  and  sorrow  may 
coexist  in  the  mind.  The  martyr  at  the  stake,  in  the  midst 
of  his  agony,  has  often  been  filled  with  ecstatic  joy. 


178  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  5.  6. 

5.  Por,  when  we  were  come  into  Macedonia,  oai 
flesli  had  no  rest,  but  we  were  troubled  on  every  side ; 
without  (were)  fightings,  within  (were)  fears. 

The  connection  is  with  the  last  clause  of  the  preceding 
verse.  I  was  comforted  in  tribulation,  for  also  {kol  ydp)  hav' 
ing  come,  into  Macedonia^  our  flesh  had  no  rest.  Paul  did 
not  leave  his  troubles  behind  him  in  Troas,  2,  12,  but  also 
in  Macedonia  his  flesh  had  no  rest,  ^j  flesh  he  does  not 
mean  his  body,  for  the  sufferings,  which  he  immediately 
specifies,  were  not  corporeal,  but  mental.  It  stands  for  his 
whole  sensitive  nature  considered  as  frail.  It  is  equivalent 
to  saying,  '  my  feeble  nature  had  no  rest.'  The  same  idea  is 
expressed  in  2,  12  by  saying,  "I  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit." 
£ut,  so  far  from  having  rest,  ice  were  troubled  (^Xt)3o/xcvot, 
either  -^/xe^a  is  to  be  supplied,  or  a  slight  departure  from  the 
regular  construction  is  to  be  assumed)  on  every  side^  Iv  Trai/rt, 
in  every  way.  This  is  amplified  and  explained  by  saying, 
without  (were)  flghtings.,  within  fears.  Calvin  and  many 
other  commentators  understand  within  and  without  to  mean 
within  and  without  the  church.  Paul's  troubles  were  partly 
from  his  contentions  with  the  Jews  and  heathen,  and  partly 
from  his  anxieties  about  the  conduct  and  welfxre  of  Christians. 
It  is  more  common  and  natural  to  understand  the  distinction 
to  be  between  inward  and  outward  troubles.  He  had  to  con- 
tend with  all  kinds  of  outward  difficulties,  and  was  oppressed 
with  an  inward  load  of  anxieties.  Fears,  painful  apprehen- 
sions lest  his  labours  should  be  vain,  lest  his  enemies  should  at 
last  prevail,  lest  his  disciples  should  apostatize  and  perish,  or 
the  peace  and  purity  of  the  church  be  disturbed. 

6.  Nevertheless  God,  that  comforteth  those  that 
are  cast  down,  comforted  us  by  the  coming  of  Titus. 

The  order  of  the  words  is  inverted  in  the  English  version. 
In  the  Greek  the  order  is.  He  who  comforteth  those  who  are 
cast  down,  comforted  us,  even  God,  by  the  coming  of  Titus. 
The  fact  that  it  is  the  characteristic  work  of  God,  or,  so  to 
speak,  his  office,  to  comfort  the  dejected,  is  thus  made  more 
l^rominent.  All  the  miserable  are  thus  encouraged,  because 
they  are  miserable,  to  look  to  that  God  who  proclaims  himself 
as  the  comforter.  It  is  to  be  remarked  that  the  objects  of  his 
compassion,  those  who  call  forth  the  exercise  of  his  power  as 


II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  7.  179 

a  consoler,  are  described  not  by  a  term  expressive  of  moral 
excellence,  but  by  a  word  which  simply  designates  them  as 
sufferers.  The  xaTrctvot  are  properly  simply  the  low,  those  who 
are  in  depressed  circumstances.  x\«,  however,  it  is  the  ten- 
dency of  such  circumstances  to  render  men  fearful,  or  meek, 
or  humble,  the  word  often  expresses  one  or  the  other  of  these 
states  of  mind.  In  10,  1  it  means  timid  as  opposed  to  bold ; 
in  1  Pet.  5,  5,  it  is  the  opposite  oi  proud.  Here,  however,  it 
has  its  simple,  proper  sense — those  who  are  low,  i.  e.  cast 
down  by  suffering  so  as  to  be  the  proper  objects  of  compassion. 
Luke  1,  52.  James  1,  9.  Ps.  18,  27.  Paul  says  God  comforted 
him  by  the  coming  of  Titus,  whom  he  had  sent  to  Corinth  to 
know  the  state  of  the  church  there. 

7.  And  not  by  his  coming  only,  but  by  the  conso- 
lation wherewith  he  was  comforted  in  you,  when  he 
told  us  your  earnest  desire,  your  mourning,  yom-  fer- 
vent mind  toward  me  ;  so  that  I  rejoiced  the  more. 

It  was  not  the  pleasure  of  seeing  Titus,  so  much  as  the  in- 
telligence which  he  brought,  which  comforted  the  apostle. 
By  the  consolation  wherewith  he  was  comforted  in  yoii^  (e^' 
t'/xti/,)  in  reference  to,  or,  as  concerns  you.  The  fact  that  Ti- 
tus was  comforted  in  Corinth  was  a  great  consolation  to  the 
apostle,  and  he  was  made  to  share  in  the  comfort  which  Titus 
had  experienced,  as  the  latter  reported  to  him  (IvayyeAAetv,  to 
hring  back  word,  to  recount.  Acts  14,  27.  16,  38,)  your  earnest 
desire,  i.  e.  either  your  earnest  desire  to  see  me  and  to  secure 
my  approbation ;  or,  your  earnest  desire  to  correct  the  evils 
existing  among  you.  The  former  is  to  be  preferred,  both  on 
account  of  the  context  and  the  signilication  of  the  word  Ittltto' 
^r}(n<;,  which  means  strong  affection.  Your  mourning^  (6hvp- 
fjL6<s,  i.  e.  wailing,  lamentation.  Matt.  2,  18,)  either,  mourning 
on  account  of  their  sins,  or  on  account  of  having  offended  and 
pamed  the  apostle.  The  latter  is  the  more  probable  on  ac- 
count of  what  follows.  ITour  fervent  mind  toward  me,  (^77X0? 
viz\p  ifxov,)  zeal  for  me,  i.  e.  the  great  interest  which  you  took 
in  me.  Gal.  4,  17.  18.  As  the  zeal  of  which  the  apostle 
speaks  is  expressly  said  to  be  a  zeal  of  which  he  \vas  the  ob- 
ject, it  is  probable  that  the  preceding  Avords  (earnest  desire 
and  mourning)  express  their  feeling  and  conduct  in  reference 
to  him.     What  was  so  specially  gratifying  to  him  waa  that  in 


180  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  8. 

a  church  in  which  he  had  met  with  so  much  opposition,  and 
in  which  the  false  teachers  had  exerted  so  great  and  so  evil  an 
influence,  the  mass  of  the  people  proved  themselves  devoted 
to  him.  Devotion  to  Paul,  however,  involved  devotion  to  the 
truth  and  holiness,  just  as  zeal  for  the  false  teachers  involved 
the  opposite.  jSo  that  I  rejoiced  the  more,  i.  e.  I  had  more 
joy  than  the  mere  coming  of  Titus  and  the  satisfaction  which 
he  exj^erienced  in  Corinth  were  able  to  impart. 

8.  For  though  I  made  you  sorry  with  a  letter,  I 
do  not  repent,  though  I  did  repent :  for  I  perceive 
that  the  same  epistle  hath  made  you  sorry,  though  (it 
were)  but  for  a  season. 

This  and  the  following  verses  assign  the  reason  why  he 
rejoiced.  It  was  because  the  letter  which  he  had  written 
them,  although  it  made  them  sorry,  yet  did  them  good. 
Though  I  made  you  sorry  (i.  e.  caused  you  grief)  loith  a  letter^ 
rather,  by  the  letter,  i.  e.  the  letter  which  related  to  the  incest- 
uous person.  I  do  not  repent,  though  I  did  repent.  That  is, 
he  regretted  writing  as  he  had  done  until  he  learned  through 
Titus  the  good  effect  his  letter  had  produced.  Cahin  says 
the  word  /xera/xeAo/xat  must  not  be  taken  here  to  express  re- 
pentance, for  that  would  imply  that  his  former  letter  was 
written  under  the  influence  of  human  feeling,  and  not  by  the 
direction  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  thinks  that  all  Paul  meant 
to  say  is,  that  he  was  grieved  at  having  given  the  Corinthians 
pain.  This,  however,  is  not  the  meaning  of  the  word.  See 
Matt.  21,  29.  32.  We  must  accommodate  our  theory  of  hi- 
spiration  to  the  phenomena  of  Scripture,  and  not  the  phenome- 
na to  our  theory.  Inspiration  simply  rendered  its  subject  in- 
fallible in  writing  and  speaking  as  the  messenger  of  God.  Paul 
might  doubt  whether  he  had  hi  a  given  instance  made  a  wise 
use  of  his  infallibility,  as  he  might  doubt  whether  he  had  wise- 
ly exercised  his  power  of  working  miracles.  He  never  doubt- 
ed as  to  the  trutli  of  what  he  had  written.  There  is  another 
thing  to  be  taken  into  consideration.  Inspiration  did  not  re- 
veal itself  in  the  consciousness.  It  is  perfectly  conceivable 
that  a  man  might  be  inspired  without  knowing  it.  Paul  was 
no  doubt  impelled  by  the  Spirit  to  write  his  former  epistle  as 
well  as  divinely  guided  in  writing ;  but  all  he  was  conscious 
of  was  his  own  thoughts  and  feehngs.     The  believer  is  not 


II.   CORINTHIANS    7,  8.  181 

conscious  of  the  operations  of  grace,  neither  were  the  apostles 
conscious  of  inspiration.  As  the  beUever,  however,  may  know 
that  he  is  the  subject  of  divine  influence,  so  the  apostles  kne^' 
that  they  were  inspired.  But  as  the  believer  may  doubt  the 
wisdom  of  some  of  his  holiest  acts,  so  the  apostles  might 
doubt  the  v/isdom  of  acts  done  under  divine  guidance.  Such 
acts  are  always  wise,  but  the  agent  may  not  always  see  their 
wisdom. 

For  I  perceive  that  the  same  epistle  made  you  sorry.  This 
gives  the  reason  why  he  at  first  regretted  having  written.  He 
knew  that  his  letter  had  excited  much  feeling  in  Corinth,  and 
until  he  learned  the  nature  and  effects  of  that  feeling,  he  re- 
pented having  written.  Though  but  for  a  season.  That  is, 
although  the  sorrow  which  he  had  occasioned  was  only  tem- 
porary, yet  it  made  him  regret  his  former  letter.  This  inter- 
pretation supposes  a  different  punctuation  of  the  passage  from 
'that  found  either  in  the  common  editions  of  the  Greek  text, 
or  in  the  English  version.  It  supposes  that  tlie  proper  place 
for  the  period  or  colon  is  after  "  I  did  not  repent,"  and  not 
after  the  following  clause,  "  I  did  repent."  In  this  latter  case 
the  whole  sense  is  different,  and  the  latter  clause  of  the  verse 
(^AeVo)  yap)  is  connected  with  the  first  clause,  and  is  intended 
to  give  the  reason  why  he  said  he  had  made  them  sorry,  and 
not  the  reason  why  he  regretted  having  done  so.     The  sense 

of  the  whole  would  then  be,  '  I  made  you  sorry for  I 

perceive  from  what  I  hear  from  Titus,  that  my  former  letter 
did,  although  only  for  a  while,  grieve  you.'  The  next  verse 
then  begins  a  new  sentence.  But  this  is  an  unnatural  con- 
struction ;  it  requires  the  verse  to  be  paraphrased  in  order  to 
bring  out  the  sense ;  and  after  all  it  amounts  to  little  to  say, 
'  I  made  you  sorry,  for  I  see  I  made  you  sorry.'  The  con- 
struction is  simpler  and  the  sense  better  if  we  put  a  colon  or 
semi-colon  after  "  I  do  not  repent,"  and  make  v.  9  a  part  of 
the  same  sentence.  '  Though  I  made  you  sorry  I  do  not  re- 
pent :  although  I  did  repent,  (for  I  see  that  my  letter  made 
you  sorry,  though  only  for  a  time,)  I  now  rejoice.'  The 
meaning  is,  'Though  I  did  repent,  I  now  rejoice.'  Thus  the 
passage  is  printed  in  the  Greek  of  Stiek  and  Thiele's  Poly- 
giott,  and,  so  far  as  the  pointing  is  concerned,  (omitting  the 
marks  of  parenthesis,)  in  Tischendorf  s  Greek  Testament.  In 
the  Vulgate  the  same  sense  is  expressed.  "  Quoniam  etsi 
contristavi  vos  in  epistola,  non  me  poenitet ;  et  si  poeniteret, 


182  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  9.  10. 

videns  quod  epistola  ilia  (etsi  ad  horam)  vos  contristavit,  uuno 
gaudeo,  &c."     So  also  Luther. 

9.  Now  I  rejoice,  not  that  ye  were  made  sorry,  but 
that  ye  sorrowed  to  repentance  :  for  ye  were  made  sor- 
ry after  a  godly  manner,  that  ye  might  receive  damage 
by  us  in  nothing. 

He  rejoiced,  not  in  their  grief,  but  that  their  grief  led  them 
to  repentance.  A  parent,  when  he  sees  a  c;hild  mourning  over 
his  sins,  sincerely  rejoices,  however  much  he  sympathizes  in 
his  grief  Sorrowed  unto  repentance^  (us  /xeravotav,)  i.  e. 
change  of  mind,  sometimes  in  the  restricted  sense  of  the  word 
mind,  (or  purpose,)  as  in  Heb.  12,  17;  generally,  in  the  com- 
prehensive sense  of  the  word  as  including  the  principles  and 
affections,  the  whole  soul,  or  inward  life.  Matt.  3,  8.  Luke  5,  • 
32.  Acts  5,  31.  Repentance,  therefore,  in  its  rehgious  sense, 
is  not  merely  a  change  of  purpose,  but  includes  a  change  of 
heart  which  leads  to  a  turning  from  sin  with  grief  and  hatred 
thereof  unto  God.  Such  is  the  repentance  here  intended,  as 
appears  from  what  follows.  M>r  (this  shows  they  sorrowed 
unto  repentance)  thei/  were  made  sorry  (they  grieved)  after  a 
godly  so7%  (Kara  ^edv,)  i.  e.  in  a  manner  agreeable  to  the  mind 
and  will  of  God  ;  so  that  God  approved  of  their  sorrow.  He 
saw  that  it  arose  from  right  views  of  their  past  conduct. 
2%at^  (tva,  in  order  that,)  as  expressing  the  design  of  God  in 
making  their  sorrow  a  sorrow  unto  repentance.  Ye  might 
receive  damage  by  us  in  nothing.  God  had  so  ordered  that 
Paul's  letter,  instead  of  producing  any  injury,  had  resulted  in 
the  greatest  spiritual  good. 

10.  For  godly  sorrow  worketh  repentance  to  sal- 
vation not  to  be  repented  of;  but  the  sorrow  of  the 
world  worketh  death. 

The  connection  is  with  the  last  clause.  '  Ye  were  not  in- 
jured by  us,  for  the  sorrow  we  occasioned  worked  repent- 
ance.' Sorrow  in  itself  is  not  repentance ;  neither  is  remorse, 
nor  self-condeumation,  nor  self-loathing,  nor  external  reforma- 
tion. These  all  are  its  attendants  or  consequences ;  but  re^ 
pentance  itself  (/xerai/ota)  is  a  turning  from  sin  to  holiness,  from 
a  state  of  sin  to  a  holv  state.     It  is  a  real  change  of  heart.     It 


II.   CORINTHIANS   1,  10.  183 

is  a  change  of  views,  feelings  and  purposes,  resulting  in  a 
change  of  life.  Godly  sorrow  icorJceth  repentance,  L  e.  that 
sorrow  on  account  of  sin,  which  arises  from  proper  apprehen- 
sions  of  God  and  of  our  relation  to  him,  necessarily  leads  to 
that  entire  change  in  the  inward  life  which  is  expressed  by 
the  word  repentance,  and  which  is  connected  Avith  salvation. 
It  is  not  the  ground  of  our  salvation ;  but  it  is  a  part  of  it  and 
a  necessary  condition  of  it.  Those  who  repent  are  saved  ;  the 
impenitent  perish.  Repentance  therefore  is  unto  salvation, 
Comp.  Acts  11,  18.  It  is  that  inward  change  in  which  salva- 
tion largely  consists.  Never  to  he  repented  of.  This  may  be- 
long either  to  the  repenta.nce  or  to  salvation.  If  to  the  latter, 
the  word  aiJ.€Taix€Xrp-o<:  may  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  unchange- 
able. See  Rom.  11,  29.  So  the  Vulgate  explains  it,  ad  salutem 
stabilem  ^  or  it  may  mean  not  to  he  regretted.  Repentance 
leads  to  a  salvation  which  no  one  ever  will  regret.  So  Luther 
and  many  of  the  moderns.  The  position  of  the  words  is  in 
favour  of  connecting  "not  to  be  repented  of"  Avith  "salva- 
tion." Had  Paul  intended  the  other  connection,  he  would 
have  probably  said  eis  /j-eravoiav  a^iwo-voiyrov.,  and  not  have 
chosen  (aixirafxeXrjTov)  a  word  of  an  entirely  different  root. 
Still,  as  "  not  to  be  repented  of"  seems  to  be  an  unsuitable  epi- 
thet when  applied  to  salvation,  the  majority  of  commentators 
prefer  the  other  connection,  and  consider  the  apostle  as  desig- 
nating true  repentance  as  that  which  no  one  will  regret  not- 
withstanding the  sorrow  with  which  it  is  attended.  JSut  the 
sorrow  of  the  icorld  icorketh  death.  By  the  sorrow  of  the 
world  is  not  meant  Avorldly  sorrow,  i.  e.  sorrow  arising  out  of 
worldly  considerations,  but  the  sorrow  of  men  of  the  world. 
In  other  words,  Koafjiov  is  the  genitive  of  the  subject,  not  a 
qualifying  genitive.  "  The  world "  means  men,  the  mass  of 
mankind  as  distinguished  from  the  church.  1  Cor.  1,  20.  Gal. 
4,  3.  John  7,  7.  14,  7.  &c.  What  therefore  the  apostle  means 
is  the  sorrow  of  unrenewed  men,  the  sorrow  of  the  unsanctified 
heart.  Of  this  sorrow,  as  opposed  to  godly  sorrow,  he  says, 
it  loorks  death.,  not  physical  death,  nor  speciiically  eternal 
death  as  opposed  to  salvation,  but  evil  in  the  general  sense 
of  the  word.  The  effects  of  godly  sorrow  are  salutary  ;  the 
effects  of  worldly  sorrow  (the  sorrow  of  worldly  men)  are  evil. 
It  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  natural  tendency  oi 
pain  and  sorrow  is  to  good.  They  tend  rather  to  excite  re- 
belUon  against  God  and  all  evil  feelings.  It  is  only  when  they 
are  sanctified,  i.  e.  when  they  are  experienced  by  the  holy,  and 


184  II.   CORINTHIAKS  7,  11. 

are  made  by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  call  into  exercise  the  resig 
nation,  patience  and  faith  of  the  sufferer,  that  they  bring  forth 
fruit  unto  righteousness.  The  natural  element  of  holiness  ia 
happiness,  and  misery  is  the  natural  element  of  sin.  They 
stand  severally  in  the  relation  both  of  cause  and  effect.  Tlie 
more  miserable  you  make  a  bad  man,  the  worse  you  make 
him.  The  wicked  are  said  to  curse  God  while  they  gnaw 
their  tongues  with  pain,  and  they  repent  not  of  their  deeds. 
Rev.  16,  10.  11. 


11.  For  behold  this  self-same  thing,  that  ye  sor- 
rowed after  a  godly  sort,  what  carefulness  it  wrought 
in  you,  yea,  (what)  clearing  of  yourselves,  yea,  (what) 
indignation,  yea,  (what)  fear,  yea,  (what)  vehement  de- 
sire, yea,  (what)  zeal,  yea,  (what)  revenge !  In  all 
(things)  ye  have  approved  yourselves  to  be  clear  in 
this  matter. 

The  question  may  be  asked  whether  Paul  means  here  to 
describe  the  uniform  effects  of  genuine  repentance,  so  as  to 
furnish  a  rule  by  which  each  one  may  judge  of  his  own  expe- 
rience. This,  to  say  the  least,  is  not  the  primary  design  of 
the  passage.  If  it  affords  such  a  rule  it  is  only  incidentally. 
The  passage  is  historical.  It  describes  the  effects  which  godly 
sorrow  produced  in  the  Corinthian  church.  It  shows  how 
the  church  felt  and  acted  in  reference  to  a  si^eciiic  offence, 
when  roused  to  a  sense  of  its  enormity.  For^  behold!  The 
connection  is  with  what  precedes.  '  Godly  sorrow  is  salutary, 
for,  see  what  effects  it  wrought  for  you.'  This  selfsame 
thi7ig^  i.  e.  this  very  thing,  viz.,  beiiig  sorry  after  a  godly 
sort.  WJiat  carefulness  it  wrought  in  you  (vfuv,  for  you,  for 
your  advantage).  Carefulness,  (a■7^ov^v,)  literally,  haste  ;  then 
the  inward  feeling  which  leads  to  haste ;  then  any  outward 
manifestation  of  that  earnestness  of  feeling.  Here  it  means 
earnest  solicitude  as  opposed  both  to  indifference  and  neglect. 
The  Corinthians  had  strangely  allowed  a  grievous  sin,  com- 
mitted by  a  church-member,  to  pass  unnoticed,  as  a  matter 
of  no  importance.  Tlie  first  effect  or  manifestation  of  their 
godly  sorrow  was  an  earnest  solicitude  on  the  subject,  and  a 
desire  to  have  the  evil  corrected ;  the  very  opposite  of  their 
former  indifference.     It  is  so  in  all  cases  of  repentance.     Sins 


II.  CORINTHIAN'S   T,  11.  185 

"V'Mch  had  been  regarded  as  of  little  account,  are  apprehended 
in  their  true  character ;  and  deep  feehng  takes  the  place  of 
unconcern.  Tea,  what  clearing  of  yourselves.  The  particle 
oXka  is  here  and  through  the  verse  rendered  yea.  It  is  used, 
as  in  1,  9,  to  indicate  a  gradation — still  more.  'Xot  only  so- 
licitude, but  moreover  clearing  of  yourselves^''  (aTroXoy'av.) 
Their  sorrow  led  them  earnestly  to  apologize  for  the  sin 
which  they  had  committed.  Not  to  extenuate  their  guilt,  but 
to  acknowledge  it  and  to  seek  forgiveness.  The  apology  for 
sin  to  which  repentance  leads,  includes  acknowledgment  and 
deprecation.  This  apology  was  addressed  to  the  apostle. 
They  endeavoured  to  regain  his  good  opinion.  Moreover, 
indignation,  either  at  the  offence  or  at  themselves  that  such 
an  offence  should  have  been  allowed.  They  felt  angry  at 
themselves  for  their  past  misconduct.  This  is  one  of  the  most 
marked  experiences  of  every  sincere  penitent.  The  unreason- 
ableness, the  meanness,  the  wickedness  of  his  conduct  rouse 
his  indignation;  he  desires  to  seek  vengeance  on  himself. 
Bengel  says  the  word  dyavaKxr^o-ts  is  chosen  with  special  pro- 
priety, as  it  denotes  a  pain  of  which  a  man  has  the  cause  in 
himself.  What  fear.  Whether  fearful  apprehension  of  God's 
displeasure,  or  fear  of  the  apostle,  depends  on  the  context. 
The  idea  is  expressed  indefinitely.  Their  repentance  was  at- 
tended by  fear  of  punishment.  Dowbtless  the  two  sentiments 
were  mingled  in  the  minds  of  the  Corinthians.  They  had  a 
fear  of  the  wrath  of  God,  and  at  the  'same  time  a  fear  of  the 
apostle's  coming  among  them  displeased  and  armed  with  the 
spiritual  power  Avhich  belonged  to  his  office.  The  context  is 
in  favour  of  making  the  latter  the  prominent  idea.  What  ve- 
hetnent  desire,  either  for  the  correction  of  the  evil  complained 
of,  or  for  the  apostle's  presence  and  approbation.  In  the  lat- 
ter case  this  clause  is  a  modification  of  the  precedhig.  It  was 
not  so  much  fear  of  the  -apostle  as  an  earnest  and  affectionate 
desire  towards  and  for  him,  that  their  godly  sorrow  had  pro- 
duced. As  in  V.  7  Titus  had  repeated  to  the  apostle  the 
earnest  desire  {e7n7r6&r]aLv,  the  same  word  as  here)  of  the  Co- 
rinthians for  him,  it  is  probable  that  the  same  is  here  meant. 
What  zeal.  In  v.  7  the  zeal  spoken  of  is  limited  or  explained 
by  the  words  {y-rr'kp  ifxov)  for  me.  Without  that  addition  they 
may  be  so  understood  here ;  zeal  or  zealous  interest  in  behalf 
of  the  apostle  manifested  by  their  taking  sides  with  him.  The 
connection,  however,  wit/i  what  follows  favours  the  assump- 
tion that  here  the  zeal  meant  is  that  of  which  the  offender  was 


186  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  12. 

the  object.  Zeal  for  his  reformation  or  punishment  What 
revenge^  (eKStKT^cris,)  vmdictive  justice.  One  of  the  sentiments 
which  godly  sorrow  had  aroused  in  them  was  the  sense  of 
justice,  the  moral  judgment  that  sin  ought  to  be  punished. 
This  is  nn  instinctive  feeling,  one  belonging  to  our  moral  con- 
stitution, and  therefore  a  revelation  of  the  nature  and  will  of 
God.  The  ground  of  the  punishment  of  sin  is  not  expediency, 
nor  is  it  primarily  the  benefit  of  the  offender,  but  the  satisfac- 
tion of  justice,  or  the  inherent  evil  of  sin  which  from  its  own 
nature,  and  apart  from  the  evil  consequences  of  impunity,  de- 
serves punishment.  Of  the  six  particulars  introduced  by 
(aXka)  yea  in  this  verse,  according  to  Bengel,  Meyer  and 
others,  "  clearing  of  yourselves  "  and  "  indignation  "  relate  to 
the  feelings  of  the  Corinthians  towards  themselves ;  "  fear  "  and 
"  vehement  desire  "  to  their  feelings  towards  the  apostle ;  and 
"zeal"  and  "revenge"  to  their  feelings  towards  the  offender. 
According  to  Olshausen,  the  "  apology  "  relates  to  their  con- 
duct ;  the  "indignation"  to  their  feelings  in  view  of  the  crime 
which  had  been  committed;  the  "fear"  to  God's  displeasure; 
the  "desire"  and  "zeal"  to  their  feelings  towards  the  apostle, 
and  "revenge"  the  consequence  of  all  the  preceding. 

In  all  things^  (iv  Travrt,)  in  every  respect,  or,  in  every 
point  of  view.  Ye  have  2^^'oved  yourselves^  (crvj^eo-TiJo-are,)  you 
have  set  yourselves  forth, .shown  yourselves  to  be  (Gal.  2,  18) 
clea7\  {ayvov<;^)  pure^  free  from  guilt.  In  this  matter^  or,  (with- 
out the  €1/,  which  the  older  M8S.  omit,)  as  to  the  matter.  The 
Corinthians  proved  themselves  to  be  free  from  the  sin  of  ap- 
proving or  in  any  way  countenancing  the  crime  in  question. 
Their  sin  consisted  in  not  more  promptly  excluding  the  of- 
fender from  their  communion.  This  whole  pxissage,  liowever, 
is  mstructive  as  presenting  a  clear  exhibition  of  the  intimate 
nature  of  church  fellowship.  One  member  committed  an  of- 
fence. The  whole  church  repents.  The  godly  sorrow  which 
the  apostle  describes  was  the  sorrow  of  the  church.  The  ef 
fects  which  that  sorrow  wrought  were  common  to  the  church 
as  such.  That  believers  are  one  body  in  Christ  Jesus,  and 
"everyone  members  one  of  another,"  so  that  "if  one  member 
suffers  all  the  members  suffer  with  it,"  is  matter  of  actual 
experience. 

12.  Wherefore,  though  I  wrote  unto  you,  (I  did  it) 
not  for  his  cause  that  had  done  the  wrong,  nor  for  his 


II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  12.  187 

cause  that  suffered  wrong,  but  that  our  care  for  you  in 
the  sight  of  God  might  appear  unto  you. 

Wherefore,  That  is,  because  my  letter  has  produced  such 
results.  The  effects  j^roduced  by  his  letter  was  the  end  he 
had  in  view  in  writing  it.  Though  I  icrote  to  you^  i.  e.  al- 
though I  interfered  with  your  affairs.  His  motive  in  writing 
he  states  first  negatively  and  then  positively.  It  was  neither 
for  the  sake  of  him  who  did  wrong,  nor  for  him  who  suffered 
wrong.  His  primary  object  was  neither  to  have  the  offender 
punished,  nor  to  secui-e  justice  being  done  to  the  injured 
party,  viz.,  the  father  whose  wife  the  son  had  married.  This 
is  the  common  and  natural  interpretation.  As,  however, 
nothing  is  elsewhere  said  of  the  lather,  and  as  the  form  of  ex- 
pression in  1  Cor.  5,  1,  (ywat/ca  ^x^iv^  to  marry,)  seems  to  im- 
ply that  the  father  of  the  offender  was  dead,  since  otherwise, 
it  is  said,  thei'e  could  have  been  no  marriage  in  the  case,  vari- 
ous other  explanations  of  this  passage  have  been  proposed. 
Some  say  that  he  "  who  suffered  wrong  "  was  the  apostle  him- 
self; others,  as  Bengel,  say  it  was  the  Corinthians,  the  singu- 
lar being  taken  for  the  plural.  Others,  as  Neander,  Billroth, 
&c.,  say  that  ahtKr^^ivTo^  is  neuter,  the  xorong  deed ;  so  that 
the  meaning  is,  '  Neither  for  the  offender  nor  for  the  offence.' 
But  these  explanations  are  all  unnatural  and  unnecessary. 
The  ordinary  interpretation  is  the  only  one  which  the  words 
suggest,  and  what  is  said  in  1  Cor.  5  is  perfectly  consistent 
with  the  assumption  that  the  father  of  the  offender  was  still 
alive.  The  positive  statement  of  his  object  in  writing  is  that 
our  care  for  you  in  the  sight  of  God  might  appear  unto  you. 
The  first  question  concerning  this  clause  relates  to  the  text. 
Instead  of  tjijlwv  (our)^  Lachmann,  Meyer  and  others  read  v^wv 
{your).  This  latter  reading  is  followed  by  Calvin  and  Luther 
as  well  as  by  many  of  the  modern  commentators.  As  the  ex- 
ternal authorities  are  nearly  equally  divided,  the  decision  rests 
mainly  on  internal  evidence.  In  favour  of  the  common  text 
is  first,  the  consideration  that  the  manifestation  of  his  love  or 
care  for  them  is  elsewhere  said  to  have  been  his  motive  in 
writing  his  former  letter,  2,  4  ;  and,  secondly,  the  words  Trpog 
v/xas  are  more  easily  explained.  '  Our  care  for  you  might  ap- 
pear unto  you,'  is  plain.  But  if  v/xwi/  is  read  these  words  give 
diflSculty.  They  must  be  rendered  {cipud  vos)  "with  you." 
'  Your  care  for  us  might  be  manifest  with  (i.  e.  among)  you.' 
That  is,  that  the  zeal  which  you  have  for  us  might  be  brought 


188  II.   CORINTHIANS   7,  13. 

out  so  as  to  be  known  by  yourselves.  This,  however,  would 
be  more  naturally  expressed  by  iv  v/juv  or  iv  iavTols,  among 
yourselves.  Besides,  the  words  "before  God,"  as  involving 
an  appeal  to  the  divine  omniscience,  are  more  in  place  if  he  is 
speaking  of  his  own  zeal,  than  if  speaking  of  theirs.  The  im- 
mediate context,  it  must  be  admitted,  is  in  favour  of  this  lat- 
ter reading.  The  apostle  had  been  describing  the  effects  of 
his  letter,  dwelHng  with  great  satisfaction  on  the  feelings 
towards  himself  which  that  letter  had  called  forth.  It  was 
natural  for  him  therefore  to  say  that  his  object  in  writing  was 
to  bring  out  this  manifestation,  and  thus  reveal  themselves  to 
themselves  as  well  as  to  him.  With  this  also  agrees  what  he 
says  in  4,  9,  "  To  this  end  also  did  I  write,  that  I  might  know 
the  proof  of  you,  whether  ye  be  obedient  in  all  things."  Still 
on  the  Avhole  the  common  text  gives  the  better  sense.  In 
either  case  the  words  Trpos  t'fias  dei^end  on  c^avepco^^i/at,  "  might 
be  manifest  towards  (or  among)  you."  So  also  do  the  words 
iviOTTLov  Tov  ^eoi),  "  that  our  cai'e  for  you  might  be  manifested 
before  God^''''  i.  e.  in  his  sight,  as  what  he  could  approve  of. 
.In  our  version  these  words  are  connected  with  our  care. 
"  Our  care  for  you  in  the  sight  of  God."  The  same  sense  is 
expressed  by  the  Vulgate ;  "  ad  manifestandam  sollicitudinem 
nostram,  quae  habemus  pro  vobis  coram  Deo."  According  to 
the  Greek  the  natural  construction  is,  "  To  manifest  in  the 
sight  of  God  our  care  for  you." 

13.  Therefore  we  were  comforted  in  your  comfort : 
yea,  and  exceedingly  the  more  joyed  we  for  the  joy  of 
Titus,  because  his  spirit  was  refreshed  by  you  all. 

Therefore.,  i.  e.  because  his  letter  had  led  them  to  repent- 
ance. TFe  v:ere  comforted  in  your  comfort.,  {lin  rrj  TrapaKX-qa-ei 
vfxQ)v,)  on  account  of  your  consolation.  This,  however,  does 
not  suit  the  state  of  the  case.  Paul  was  comforted  by  their 
repentance,  not  by  their  consolation.  To  meet  this  difficulty 
some  make  vfjuTyv  the  genitive  of  the  source ;  so  that  the  sense 
would  be,  '  We  were  comforted  with  the  consolation  derived 
from  you.'  The  great  majority  of  modern  editors  read  rj/jiwv 
instead  of  v/xwv,  and  put  a  stop  after  TrapaKeKkrjfxeSa.  This 
gives  a  far  better  sense.  '  Therefore  we  have  been  comforted  : 
and  besides  (cTrt)  our  consolation,  we  have  rejoiced  exceeding- 
ly in  the  joy  of  Titus.'     Paul  had  not  only  the  consolation  de- 


II.  CORINTHIANS   7,  14.15. 


189 


med  from  their  repentance,  but  in  addition  to  that,  he  was 
delighted  to  find  Titus  so  full  of  joy.  Compare  v.  7.  The 
Vulgate  has  the  same  reading  and  pointing.  Ideo  consolati 
sumus.  In  consolatione  autem  nostra  abundantius  magis  ga- 
Visi  sumus  super  gaudio  Titi.  Because  his  spirit  was  re^ 
freshed  by  you  all.  This  is  the  reason  of  his  joy.  Titus 
rejoiced  because  his  spirit  was  refreshed^  (amTreTraurat,)  derived 
^est,  according  to  the  comprehensive  scriptural  sense  of  the 
word  "rest." 


14.  For  if  I  have  boasted  any  thing  to  him  of  you, 
I  am  not  ashamed ;  but  as  we  spake  all  things  to  you 
in  truth,  even  so  our  boasting,  which  (I  made)  before 
Titus,  is  found  a  truth. 

This  is  the  reason  why  Paul  was  so  rejoiced  that  Titus  was 
satisfied  with  what  he  saw  in  Corinth.  Paul  had  boasted  to 
him  of  the  Corinthians.  He  had  predicted  that  he  would  find 
them  obedient,  and  ready  to  correct  the  evils  adverted  to  in 
his  former  letter.  Had  these  predictions  proved  Mse,  he 
would  have  been  mortified, — ashamed,  as  he  says ;  but  as  they 
were  more  than  fulfilled,  he  naturally  rejoiced.  But  as  ice 
spahe  all  things  to  you  in  truth.  No  doubt  in  allusion  to  the 
charge  of  want  of  adherence  to  the  truth  made  against  him 
by  the  false  teachers,  to  which  he  refers  above,  1,  17.  18.  As 
he  spoke  the  truth  to  the  Corinthians,  so  he  spoke  the  truth 
of  them.  We  spake  in  truths  {iv  dAvy^eia,)  truly.  So  our 
boasting  before  Titus  [rj  irrl  TtVou)  is  found  a  truth,  (dXry^^eia 
iyevT^Sr},)  has  become  truth.  Though  it  is  done  incidentally, 
yet  the  revelation  to  the  Corinthians  that  Paul  had  spoken  of 
them  in  terms  of  commendation  must  have  convinced  them 
of  his  love.  This  was  one  of  the  objects,  as  appears  from  the 
whole  epistle,  he  had  much  at  heart. 

15.  And  his  inward  affection  is  more  abundant 
toward  you,  whilst  he  remembereth  the  obedience  of 
you  all,  how  with  fear  and  trembling  ye  received 
him. 

A  continuation  of  the  sentence  begun  in  the  former  verse. 
Paul  informs  the  Corinthians  that  Titus's  love  for  them  waa 


190  II.   CORINTHIAN'S    7,  16. 

greater  now  than  when  he  was  with  them.  The  recollection 
of  their  good  conduct  warmed  his  heart  towards  them.  His 
inward  affection^  literally,  his  bowels,  which  in  the  Scriptures 
is  a  figurative  expression  for  love,  compassion,  or  any  other 
tender  aftection.  Whilst  lie  rememhereth^  literally,  remember- 
ing^  i.  e.  because  he  remembers.  Your  obedience^  viz.,  towai'ds 
}iim,  as  appears  from  what  follows.  How  loithfear  and  treni- 
hling  ye  received  hhn.  "  Fear  and  trembling  "  is  a  common 
scriptural  expression  for  reverence,  or  solicitous  anxiety  lest 
we  should  fail  in  doing  all  that  is  required  of  us.  1  Cor.  2,  3 
Eph.  6,  5. 

16.  I  rejoice,  therefore,  that  I  have  confidence  in 
you  in  all  (things). 

This  is  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter.  The  first  seven 
chapters  of  the  epistle  are  intimately  connected.  They  all  re- 
late to  the  state  of  the  congregation  at  Corinth  and  to  Paul's 
relation  to  the  people  there.  The  eighth  and  ninth  chapters 
form  a  distinct  division  of  the  epistle.  Here,  therefore,  we 
have  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  preceding  discussion.  The 
result  of  the  long  conflict  of  feeling  in  reference  to  the  Corin- 
thians as  a  church,  was  the  full  restoration  of  confidence.  I 
rejoice  that  I  have  confidence  in  you  in  all  things,  {Iv  Travri,  in 
every  thing).  I  have  confidence  in  you^  (^appu)  iv  v/xli^)  I  have 
good  courage,  am  full  of  hope  and  confidence.  5,  6.  Heb.  13,  6. 
As  Sappeoi  is  not  elsewhere  constructed  with  ev,  Meyer  says 
the  meaning  is,  'I  am  of  good  courage,  through  you.'  If  this 
objection  to  the  common  explanation  be  considered  of  weight, 
iv  had  better  be  rendered  before.  '  I  stand  full  of  confidence 
before  you,  i.  e.  in  your  presence.'  1  Cor.  14,  11.  The  sense, 
however,  expressed  by  the  common  interp-etatioii  is  better. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   8.  191 


CHAPTER  Yin. 


The  extraordinary  liberality  of  the  Macedonians,  vs.  1-6.  Exhortation  to 
the  Corinthians  to  follow  the  example  of  their  Macedonian  brethren,  vs. 
7-16.  Commendation  of  Titus  for  his  zeal  in  promoting  the  collection 
of  contributions  for  the  poor,  and  of  the  other  brethren  who  were  to 
accompany  him  to  Corinth,  vs,  17-24. 

Exhortation  to  liberality  to  the  poor. 

To  this  subject  the  apostle  devotes  this  and  the  folio  wing 
chapter.  He  begins  by  setting  before  the  Corinthians  the 
liberality  of  the  churches  in  Macedonia.  They,  in  the  midst 
of  great  affliction  and  of  extreme  poverty,  had  exceeded  their 
abihty  in  the  contributions  which  they  had  made  for  the 
saints,  vs.  1-3.  And  this  not  by  constraint  or  in  obedience  to 
earnest  entreaties  on  the  part  of  the  apostle ;  but  on  the  con- 
trary, it  was  they  who  besought  him  to  receive  and  take 
charge  of  their  alms,  v.  4.  Liberality  to  the  poor  was  only  a 
part  of  what  they  did ;  they  devoted  themselves  to  the  Lord, 
V.  5.  The  conduct  of  the  Macedonians  led  the  apostle  to  ex- 
hort Titus,  as  he  had  already  begun  the  work,  to  carry  it  on 
to  completion  in  Cormth,  v.  6. 

He  begs  them,  therefore,  to  add  this  to  all  their  other 
graces,  v.  7.  This  was  a  matter  of  advice,  not  of  command. 
He  was  induced  to  give  this  exhortation  because  others  had 
evinced  so  much  zeal  in  this  matter,  and  because  he  desired 
them  to  prove  the  sincerity  of  their  love.  What  was  all  they 
could  do  for  others,  compared  to  what  Christ  had  done  for 
them,  vs.  8.  9.  The  exercise  of  hberahty  was  a  good  to  them, 
provided  their  feelings  found  expression  in  corresponding 
acts,  vs.  10.  11.  The  disposition,  not  the  amount  of  their  con- 
tributions, was  the  main  thing,  v.  12.  What  the  apostle 
wished  was  that  there  might  be  some  approximation  to 
equality  among  Christians,  that  the  abundance  of  one  may 
supply  the  wants  of  another,  vs.  13-15. 

He  thanks  God  who  had  inspired  Titus  with  so  much  zeal 
on  this  subject,  vs.  16.  17.  With  him  he  had  sent  a  brother 
who  had  not  only  the  approbation  of  the  churches,  but  had 
been  chosen  for  the  very  purpose  of  taking  charge  of  the  con- 
tributions in  connection  with  the  apostle,  vs.  18.  19.  Paul  was 
determined  to  avoid  all  occasion  of  reproach,  and  therefore  he 
associated  others  with  himself  in  the  charge  of  the  money  in- 
9 


192  II.    CORINTHIANS   8,  1.  2. 

trusted  to  Lira,  vs.  20.  21.  With  those  ah-eady  mentioned  he 
sent  another  brother  of  approved  character  and  great  zeal,  v. 
22.  Therefore  if  any  one  inquired  who  Titus  was,  they  might 
answer,  lie  was  Paul's  companion  and  fellow-labourer ;  or  who 
those  brethren  were,  they  might  say,  They  were  the  messen- 
gers of  the  churches,  and  the  glory  of  Christ.  Let  the  church 
therefore  prove  their  love  and  justify  his  boasting  of  them, 
vs.  23.  24. 

1.  Moreover,  brethren,  we  do  you  to  wit  of  the 
grace  of  God  bestowed  on  the  chiu-ches  of  Macedonia. 

Moreover  (8c)  marks  the  transition  to  a  new  subject.  We 
do  you  to  wit^  (yvwpt^o/x€v,)  'we  cause  you  to  know.'  The 
word  to  wit,  (Anglo-Saxon,  Witan ;  German,  Wissen,)  to 
know,  and  the  cognate  words.  Wis  and  Wot,  are  nearly  obso- 
lete, although  they  occur  frequently  in  our  version.  The 
grace  of  God,  the  divine  favour.  The  liberality  of  the  Corin- 
thians was  due  to  the  operation  of  the  grace  of  God.  The 
sacred  writers  constantly  recognize  the  fact  that  the  freest 
and  most  spontaneous  acts  of  men,  their  inward  states  and 
the  outward  manifestations  of  those  states,  when  good,  are 
due  to  the  secret  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  which 
eludes  our  consciousness.  The  believer  is  most  truly  self-de- 
termined, when  determined  by  the  grace  of  God.  bestowed 
on,  [SeSofxivrjv  iv,)  "  given  in,"  i.  e.  given  so  that  it  is  in.  See 
1,  22.  "  Given  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit  in  our  hearts."  In  v. 
16  of  this  chapter,  StSoVn  iv  is  rendered  ^^put  into^  The 
churches  of  Macedo7iia.  Under  the  Romans  Macedonia  in- 
cluded the  whole  of  the  northern  provinces  of  Greece.  The 
churches  of  that  region  founded  by  the  apostle  were  those  of 
Philippi,  Thessalonica,  and  Beroea.  Of  the  extraordinary 
liberality  of  those  churches  the  epistles  of  Paul  furnish  numer- 
ous intimations.  11,  9.    Phil.  2,  25.    4,  15.  18. 

2.  How  that,  in  a  great  trial  of  affliction,  the  abun- 
dance of  their  joy,  and  their  deep  poverty,  abounded 
unto  the  riches  of  their  hberahty. 

A  somewhat  condensed  sentence,  meaning,  as  some  say, 
that  in  the  midst  of  their  afflictions  their  joy,  and  in  the  midst 
of  their  poverty,  their  liberality  abounded.  But  this  brings 
into  view  two  graces,  joy  in  affliction,  and  liberality  in  poverty, 


II.   CORIXTHIAXS   8,  2.  193 

whereas  the  context  calls  for  only  one.  The  meaning  rather 
is,  that  notwithstanding  their  afflictions,  their  joy  and  their 
poverty  abounded  to  their  liberality.  This  the  grammatical 
structure  of  the  passage  requires.  Hoio  that  {orC) ;  the  con- 
nection is  with  the  verb  in  the  preceding  verse,  '  I  cause  you 
to  know  that,  &c.'  In  a  great  trial  of  affliction^  i.  e.  in  afflic- 
tions which  were  a  great  trial  (Soki/xt;),  i.  e.  a  test  of  their  sin- 
cerity and  devotion.  These  afflictions  were  either  those 
which  they  shared  in  common  with  their  fellow-citizens,  aris- 
ing out  of  their  social  condition,  or  they  were  peculiar  to  them 
as  Christians,  arising  from  persecution.  In  writing  to  the 
Thessalonians,  Paul  reminds  them  that  they  had  received  the 
word  in  much  affliction.  1,  6.  2,  14.  Comp.  Acts  16,  20.  17,  5. 
The  abundance  of  their  joy ;  i.  e.  the  joy  arising  from  the 
pardon  of  their  sins  and  the  favour  of  God,  which  in  1  Thess. 
1,  6,  he  calls  the  joy  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  was  abundant.  That 
is,  it  rose  above  their  sorrows,  and  produced  in  them  the  ef- 
fect of  which  he  afterwards  speaks.  And  their  deep  poverty^ 
(t]  Kara  ^a^ovs  Trrcoxeta,)  their  abject  poverty,  or  poverty  down 
to  the  depth.  Abounded  unto^  i.  e.  manifested  itself  as  abun- 
dant in  relation  to.  The  same  verb  (cTrcpto-o-euo-ci/)  belongs  to 
both  the  preceding  nouns,  "joy"  and  "poverty,"  but  in  a 
somewhat  ditferent  sense.  Their  joy  abounded  unto  their 
liberahty,  because  it  produced  it.  The  effect  proved  the  joy 
to  be  abundant.  Their  poverty  abounded  unto  their  liberali- 
ty, because  it  was  seen  to  be  great  in  relation  to  it.  Their 
liberality  made  their  poverty,  by  contrast,  appear  the  greater. 
Unto  the  riches^  (7rA.o£n-os,)  a  favourite  word  with  Paul,  which 
he  often  uses  in  the  sense  of  abundance.  Rom.  2,  4,  "  Riches 
of  his  goodness,"  for  abundant  goodness.  Eph.  1,  7,  "Riches 
of  his  grace,"  for  his  abundant  grace  ;  1,  18,  "Riches  of  his 
glory,"  for  abundant  glory,  &c.  Of  their  liberality^  aTrXoT?;?, 
which  is  properly  the  opposite  of  duplicity,  or  double-minded- 
ness,  and,  therefore,  singleness  of  heart,  simplicity,  sincerity. 
Eph.  6,  5.  Col.  3,  22.  The  ScrijDtures,  however,  often  use  a 
generic  term  for  a  specific  one,  as  glory  for  wisdom,  or  mercy, 
or  power,  which  are  different  forms  of  the  divine  glory.  So 
here  the  general  term  for  right-mindedness  is  put  for  liberali- 
ty, which  is  a  sj^ecific  form  or  manifestaticm  of  the  generic 
virtue.  Comp.  9,  11.  Rom.  12,  8.  In  reference  to  the  pover- 
ty of  the  Macedonian  churches,  Mr.  Stanley,  in  his  Commen- 
tary on  this  Epistle,  aj^propriately  quotes  a  passage  from  Dr. 
Arnold's  Roman   Commonwealth,  in  which  he  says,   "The 


194  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  3-5.  ! 

condition  of  Greece  in  the  time  of  Augustus  was  one  of  deso- 
lation and  distress.  It  had  suffered  severely  by  being  the 
seat  of  the  successi\'e  civil  wai-s  between  Caesar  and  Pompey, 
between  the  Triumvirs  and  Brutus  and  Cassius,  and  lastly, 
between  Augustus  and  Antonius.  Besides,  the  country  had 
never  recovered  from  the  long  series  of  miseries  which  had 
succeeded  and  accompanied  its  conquest  by  the  Romans :  and 
between  those  times  and  the  civil  contest  between  Pompey 
and  Caesar,  it  had  been  again  exposed  to  all  the  evils  of  war 
when  Sylla  was  disputing  the  possession  of  it  with  the  general 
of  Mithridates.  .  .  .  The  provinces  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia, 
when  they  petitioned  for  a  diminution  of  their  burdens,  in  the 
reign  of  Tiberius,  were  considered  so  deserving  of  compassion 
that  they  were  transferred  for  a  time  from  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Senate  to  that  of  the  Emperor,  (as  involving  less  heavy 
taxation.) " 

3-5.  Tor  to  (their)  power,  I  bear  record,  yea,  and 
beyond  (their)  power,  (they  were)  wilHng  of  themselves  ; 
praying  us  with  much  entreaty,  that  we  would  receive 
the  gift,  and  (take  upon  us)  the  fellowship  of  the  min- 
istering to  the  saints.  And  (this  they  did,)  not  as  we 
hoped,  but  first  gave  their  own  selves  to  the  Lord,  and 
unto  us  by  the  will  of  God. 

These  verses  must  be  taken  together  on  account  of  the 
grammatical  construction.  Wherever  the  reader  of  the  Eng- 
lish version  sees  the  frequent  use  of  words  in  Italics,  he  may 
conclude  there  is  some  difficulty  or  obscurity  in  the  original, 
which  the  translators  endeavour  to  explain  by  additions  to  the 
text.  In  these  verses  there  are  no  less  than  fiye  such  interpo- 
lations; three  of  which  materially  affect  the  sense,  viz.,  the 
words,  they  were^  take  upon  us,  and,  this  they  did.  The  first 
point  is  to  determine  the  text.  The  words  Si^aa^ai  •17/x.as  are 
omitted  in  the  great  majority  of  the  MSS.  versions  and 
Fathers,  and  seem  very  much  like  an  explanatory  gloss,  or  an 
inter})olation  analogous  to  the  explanations  in  Italics  so  com- 
mon in  our  version.  They  are,  therefore,  rejected  by  Gries- 
bach,  and  by  ahnost  all  editors  since  his  time.  Tlieir  insertion 
alters  the  sense  materially.  If  these  words  are  read,  Paul 
represents  the  Macedonian  Christians  as  begging  him  to  re- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  3=-5.  195 

ceive  their  contributions  and  to  take  upon  hira  the  distriLution 
of  them.  If  they  are  omitted,  the  sense  is,  they  begged  to 
be  permitted  to  contribute.  Granting,  however,  that  these 
words  should  be  omitted,  the  construction  of  the  passage  is 
doubtful.  Stanley  says  it  is  "  a  sentence  which  has  been  en- 
tirely shattered  in  passing  through  the  apostle's  mind."  He 
proposes  to  reduce  it  to  order  in  the  same  way  that  Bengel 
does,  who,  however,  thinks  that,  so  far  from  the  sentence  be- 
ing shattered,  every  thing  is  smooth  and  easy.  He  says  the 
word  ihuiKav  sustains  the  structure  of  the  whole  passage ; 
avSaipeTot  and  Seo/xevoL  are  its  nominatives  ;  x^'-P'-^y  KOLvwviav  and 
cavrot's  are  its  objects.  The  sense  then  is,  '  Of  their  own  ac- 
cord, beyond  their  ability  and  with  many  prayers  they  gave 
not  their  gifts  only  as  a  contribution  to  the  saints,  but  them- 
selves to  the  Lord  and  to  us.'  Any  one,  however,  who  looks 
at  the  Greek  sees  that  it  is  very  unnatural  to  make  x^P'-^  cle- 
pend  on  eSco/cav;  it  belongs  to  Seo/xci/ot.  The  construction, 
therefore,  adopted  by  Fritzsche,  Billroth,  Meyer  and  others  is, 
at  least  as  to  that  point,  to  be  preferred.  Meyer  says  that  to 
eSoiKav  there  are  four  limiting  or  qualifying  clauses  attached. 
TAeT/  gave^  1.  Beyond  their  power;  2.  Of  their  own  motion  ; 
3.  Praying  to  be  allowed  to  give ;  and  4.  Not  as  we  expected, 
but  themselves.  De  Wette  and  many  others  relieve  the 
harshness  of  this  construction  so  far  as  the  last  clause  is  con- 
cerned by  making  the  sentence  end  with  the  fourth  verse,  and 
supplying  eSooKav  in  v.  3.  "  They  gave  beyond  their  power, 
of  their  own  accord,  begging  to  be  allowed  to  take  part  in 
the  contribution  to  the  saints.  And  beyond  our  expectation 
they  gave  themselves  to  the  Lord." 

As  to  the  connection,  on  is  evidently  equivalent  to  yap,  as 
these  verses  are  the  proof  of  what  is  said  in  v.  2.  The  libe- 
rality of  the  Macedonian  churches  was  great,  for  to  their 
poicer^  (Kara  Swa/xiv,)  according  to  their  ability,  I  bear  testi- 
mony, and  beyond  their  poioer  (v-n-kp  in  the  common  text,  in 
the  critical  editions  Trapa  8wa/xtv).  Here  the  word  eSojKav  is 
implied.  'They  gave  beyond  their  ability,'  au^^atperot,  self- 
moved,  i.  e.  spontaneously,  without  any  suggestion  or  excite- 
ment from  me.'  From  9,  2,  it  appears  that  Paul  had  boasted 
to  the  Macedonians  that  Achaia  (the  Corinthians)  was  ready 
a  year  ago,  and  that  this  had  excited  their  zeal.  These  twa 
representations  are  perfectly  consistent.  In  detailing  the  sue 
cess  of  the  gospel  in  Corinth  the  apostle  would  naturally  refer 
to  the  Kberality  of  the  disciples.     It  was  the  simple  mentioQ 


196  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  3-5. 

of  this  fact  wMch  led  tlie  Macedonians,  without  any  exhorta 
tion  from  the  apostle,  but  of  their  own  accord,  to  make  the 
contribution  of  which  he  here  speaks.  Our  translators  by  the 
insertion  of  the  words  they  were  alter  the  sense  of  this  verse. 
They  make  the  apostle  say,  '  They  were  willing  beyond  their 
power.'  Whereas  what  he  says  is,  '  They  gave  spontaneously 
beyond  their  power.'  The  word  cSooKav,  they  gave^  though 
not  expressed  until  the  end  of  the  passage,  is  clearly  implied 
from  the  beginning. 

Praying  us  with  much  entreaty.  The  thing  for  which  the 
Macedonians  so  earnestly  prayed  was,  according  to  the  re- 
ceived text  and  our  version,  that  the  apostle  would  receive 
their  alms  and  take  upon  him  the  distribution  of  them.  But 
by  common  consent  the  words  Zi^aa-Sox  r]ua<;  [that  ice  would 
receive)  should  be  omitted,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  Greek 
to  answer  to  the  interpolated  words  take  %qjon  us.  The 
w^ords  are,  Seo/xevot  rjfiCov  rr]v  x^ptv  Kttt  rrjv  KOivioviav^  begging  of 
US  the  favour  and  felloioship.,  (or  participation,)  i.  e.  the  favour 
of  a  partici2)ation.  The  latter  word  explains  the  former ;  the 
favour  they  asked  was  that  of  taking  part  in  the  ministry  to 
the  saints.  The  word  StaKovta,  ministry^  service^  is  often  used 
in  the  sense  oi  aid  or  relief.  9,  1.  13.  Acts  6,  1.  11,  29.  Here, 
according  to  some,  the  sentence  ends.  The  more  common 
interpretation  supposes  koI  ov  Ka^^ojs  >;A.7rio-ayu.€i/  to  be  a  new 
modihcation  of  the  principal  idea,  "  and  not  as  we  expected," 
i.  e.  a  moderate  contribution,  but  they  first  gave  their  own 
selves  to  the  Lord  and  to  us.  This  does  not  mean  that  they 
gave  themselves  before  they  gave  their  alms;  but  they  gave 
themselves  first  to  the  Lord,  tlien  to  us;  rrp^Tov  belongs  to 
Kvpto)  and  not  to  eSojKav.  J^i7'st  does  not  mean  first  in  time, 
but  in  importance  and  order.  Compare  Acts  15,  28.  Ex- 
odus 14,  31.  The  offering  was  immediately  and  directly 
to  Christ,  and  subordinately  to  the  apostle.  By  giving 
themselves  to  the  Lord  the  apostle  means  that  not  con- 
tent with  giving  their  money  they  had  given  themselves; 
made  an  entire  dedication  of  all  tliey  had  and  all  they  were 
to  their  divine  blaster.  This  was  far  beyond  his  expec- 
tations. To  imderstand  tliis  expression  as  indicating  that 
devotion  to  Christ  was  the  motive  which  determined  their 
hberality  is  inconsistent  with  the  context.  Their  inward  de- 
votion to  Christ  was  not  a  thing  to  take  the  apostle  by  sur- 
pi-ise ;  that  was  involved  in  their  profession  of  the  gospel. 
What  surpassed  his  expectations  was,  that  their  liberality  led 


II.   CORINTHIANS  8,  6.  191 

10  the  gift  not  of  their  money  only  but  of  themselves.  Some 
say  that  this  means  that  they  offered  themselves  to  go  to  Cor- 
inth or  elsewhere  to  collect  money  for  the  poor.  But  the 
sense  is  fuller  and  simpler  as  above  explained.  £7/  th^  will 
of  God.  That  is,  the  will  of  God  was  the  cause  of  their  giv- 
ing themselves  to  the  Lord,  &c.  It  is  (8ta  ^eX^/xaros,  not  Kara 
S^Krifia)  5y,  not  according  to,  the  will  of  God. 

6.  Insoraucli  that  we  desired  Titus,  tliat  as  he  had 
begun,  so  he  would  also  finish  in  you  the  same  grace 
also. 

Insomuch  (ets  to  irapaKaX.)  SO  that  we  were  induced  to  ex- 
hort Titus.  Paul,  1  Cor.  16,  1,  had  urged  the  Corinthians  to 
make  collections  for  the  poor  saints.  Titus  visited  Corinth 
after  that  letter  was  written  and  made  a  beginning  in  this 
work.  When  Paul  came  to  Macedonia  and  found  how  hberally 
the  churches  there  had  contributed,  he  urged  Titus  to  return 
to  Corinth  and  complete  what  he  had  so  successfully  begun. 
The  exhortation  therefore  addressed  to  Titus,  of  which  the 
apostle  here  speaks,  was  not  the  exhortation  given  him  before 
the  visit  from  which  he  had  just  returned,  but  that  which  he 
gave  him  in  reference  to  a  renewed  visit  yet  to  be  made. 
Instead  therefore  of  the  rendering,  I  desired  Titus,  it  would 
would  be  plainer  to  translate,  I  have  desired  hiin.  That  (tVa, 
not  m  order  that,  according  to  the  usual  force  of  the  particle, 
but  that,  as  expressing  the  contents  of  the  request),  as  he  had 
hegun,  {TrpoevtjpiaTo,  a  word  which  occurs  nowhere  but  in  this 
chapter,)  had  begun  before.  This  may  mean,  'had  already 
begun,'  i.  e.  begun  before  the  time  of  Paul's  writing ;  or,  had 
begun  before  the  Macedonians  made  their  collections.  The 
latter  is  the  more  probable  meaning,  since,  as  appears  from 
V.  10,  the  Corinthians  had  commenced  this  work  before  the 
Macedonian  churches  had  moved  in  the  business.  So  M 
would  also  finish,  i.  e.  either  in  the  sense  of  bringing  a  given 
work  to  an  end,  Heb.  9,  6,  or  of  perfecting  an  inward  grace, 
^,1.  In  you,  ets  vyuas,  in  relation  to,  or,  for  you.  Matt.  10,  10. 
This  grace  also  y  xo.pLv  may  here  mean  either  good  icork,  or, 
grace,  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word.  The  connection 
with  the  following  verse  is  in  favour  of  understanding  it  in 
the  latter  sense.  It  was  a  disposition  of  the  mind  that  Titus 
was  exhorted  to  bring  into  full  exercise  among  the  Corinthi- 


198  II.   CORI]?rrHIAXS   8,  7. 

ans.     The  grace  spoken  of  was  sometliing  ^vhich  belongs  to 
the  same  category  with  faith,  knowledge,  and  love. 

7.  Therefore,  as  ye  abound  in  every  (thing,  in) 
faith,  and  utterance,  and  knowledge,  and  (in)  all  dili- 
gence, and  (in)  your  love  to  us,  (see)  that  ye  abound  in 
this  grace  also. 

From  this  verse  onward  to  v.  16  the  apostle  urges  on  the 
Corinthians  the  duty  of  liberality.  1.  Because  it  was  necessa- 
ry to  the  completeness  and  harmony  of  their  Christian  charac- 
ter ;  2.  Because  it  would  be  a  proof  of  their  sincerity ;  3.  Be- 
cause Christ  had  become  poor  for  their  sake ;  4.  Because  it 
would  redound  to  their  own  advantage,  inasmuch  as  consist- 
ency required  that  having  manifested  the  disposition,  they 
should  carry  it  out  in  action';  and  5.  Because  what  was 
required  of  them  was  perfectly  reasonable.  They  were  asked 
to  give  only  according  to  their  means ;  and  vv^hat  they  were 
called  upon  to  do  for  others,  others  under  like  circumstances 
would  be  required  to  do  for  them.  Therefore  is  not  a  proper 
translation  of  dAAa  {hut).  The  word  is  often  used  to  mark  a 
transition  to  a  new  subject,  and  specially  where  what  follows 
is  an  exhortation  or  command.  Mark  16,  7.  Acts  9,  6.  10,  20. 
As  ye  abound^  i.  e.  have  in  abundance,  or,  have  more  than 
others,  i.  e.  excel.  In  every  tiling^  [kv  Travrt,)  limited  of  course 
by  the  context,  and  explained  by  what  follows,  '  every  gilt 
and  grace.'  The  same  testimony  is  borne  in  iavour  of  the 
Corinthians,  1  Cor.  ],  5.  7.  That  the  apostle  sometimes 
speaks  so  favourably,  and  sometimes  so  unfavourably  of  the 
church  in  Corinth,  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that 
some  of  the  people  were  very  good,  probably  the  majority, 
and.  some,  especially  among  the  teachers,  very  much  the  re- 
verse. In  faith.  To  abound  in  faith  is  to  have  a  strong, 
constant,  operative  faith,  sustaining  and  controlling  the  wliole 
inward  and  outward  life.  In  utterance  and  knoioledge^  (Xoyw 
Kttt  yvwcret,)  the  same  combination  as  in  1  Cor.  1,  5.  Here  and 
there  our  translators  have  rendered  Aoyos  utterance  y  in  both 
cases  it  may  mean  doctrine.,  as  it  docs  in  so  many  passages, 
especially  in  such  cases  as  "  word  of  truth,"  "  word  of  salva- 
tion," "word  of  righteousness,"  "word  of  Christ."  The 
meaning,  therefore,  is  either  that  they  were  enriched  with  the 
gifts  of  utterance  and  knowledge,  or  doctrine  and  knowledga 


II.  corinthia:n^s  8,  s.  199 

A0709  is  the  Christian  truth  as  preached,  yvooo-is  that  truth  a? 
apprehended  or  understood.  In  diligence^  (o-ttovSt;,)  earnest- 
ness,  a  general  term  for  the  energy  or  vigour  of  their  spiritual 
life,  of  which  their  love  was  one  manifestation.  In  your  lovo 
to  vs.  The  expression  in  Greek  is  peculiar,  rfj  i$  vfj-Siv  ei/  rjfjilv 
dyctTTTy,  the  love  ichich  is  of  you  in  us,  i.  e.  your  love  (to  us) 
which  we  cherish  in  our  hearts.  That  is,  which  we  so  highly 
estimate.  Or,  simply,  amove  a  vohis  ^yrofecto  et  in  me  collato. 
That  ye  may  abound.  The  tVa  Trepca-cr.  is  most  naturally  ex- 
plained by  supplying  some  word  as  in  our  version,  jSee  that 
ye  abound.  Compare  Gal.  2,  10.  Jn  this  grace  also,  i.  e.  the 
grace  of  liberality.  Others  here  as  in  the  preceding  verse 
make  x^-P'-^  mean  good  work.  But  this  is  not  so  consistent 
with  the  context.  Faith,  knowledge,  and  love  are  not  good 
works  so  much  as  divine  gifts,  and  so  also  is  liberality. 

8.  I  speak  not  by  commandment,  but  by  occasion 
of  the  forwardness  of  others,  and  to  prove  the  sincerity 
of  your  love. 

The  apostle,  agreeably  to  his  usual  manner,  states  first 
negatively,  and  then  affirmatively,  his  object  in  what  he  had 
said.  It  was  not  of  the  nature  of  a  command.  It  was  not 
obedience,  but  spontaneous  liberality  he  desired.  The  latter 
may  be  excited  by  the  exhibition  of  appropriate  motives,  but 
it  cannot  be  yielded  to  authority.  Ahnsgiving  in  obedience 
to  a  command,  or  to  satisfy  conscience,  is  not  an  act  of  liber- 
ality. What  is  not  spontaneous  is  not  liberal.  Paul,  there- 
fore, would  not  coerce  them  by  a  command.  His  object  was 
to  put  the  genuineness  of  their  love  to  the  test.  The  nature 
of  the  test  was  suggested  by  the  zeal  of  the  Macedonians.  So 
it  was  by  the  occasion  of  the  forwardness  of  others  he  was 
led  to  put  their  love  to  that  trial.  The  real  test  of  the 
genuineness  of  any  inward  affection  is  not  so  much  the  charac- 
ter of  the  feeling  as  it  reveals  itself  in  our  consciousness,  as 
the  course  of  action  to  which  it  leads.  Many  persons,  if  they 
judged  themselves  by  their  feeUngs,  would  regard  themselves 
as  truly  compassionate  ;  but  a  judgment  founded  on  their  acts 
would  lead  to  the  opposite  conclusion.  So  many  suppose  they 
really  love  God  because  they  are  conscious  of  feelings  which 
they  dignify  with  that  name ;  yet  they  do  not  obey  him.  It 
is  thereby  by  the  fruits  of  feeling  we  must  judge  of  its  genu- 
ineness both  in  ourselves  and  others. 
9* 


?00  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  9. 

9.  Per  ye  know  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christi 
that  though  he  was  rich,  yet  for  your  sakes  he  became 
poor,  that  ye  through  his  poverty  might  be  rich. 

This  verse  is  a  parenthesis,  the  sentence  begun  in  v.  8  be- 
ing continued  in  v.  10.  Still  the  connection  between  this  and 
the  preceding  verse  is  intimate  and  immediate.  There  are 
two  things  indicated  and  intended  in  this  verse.  That  self- 
sacrifice  is  the  proper  test  of  love.  And  second,  that  the 
example  of  Christ,  and  the  obligation  under  which  we  lie  to 
him,  should  lead  us  to  do  good  to  others.  The  apostle  evi- 
dently combines  these  two  thoughts.  'I  desire,'  he  says,  'to 
put  your  love  to  the  test  of  self-sacrifice,  for  ye  know  that 
Christ's  love  was  thus  manifested ; '  and,  '  You  may  well  be 
exjjected  to  sacrifice  yourselves  for  others,  since  Christ  gave 
himself  for  j^'oii.'  It  is  not  only  the  example  of  Christ  which 
is  held  up  for  our  imitation;  but  gratitude  to  Christ  for  the 
infinite  blessings  we  receive  from  him  is  presented  as  the  mo- 
tive to  liberality.  For  ye  hnow.  The  fact  referred  to  includ- 
ing the  highest  mystery  of  the  gospel,  viz.,  the  incarnation  of 
the  Son  of  God,  or,  the  manifestation  of  God  in  the  flesh,  and 
the  love  therein  manifested,  is  assumed  to  be  known  and 
acknowledged  by  all  who  called  themselves  Christians.  Ye 
know,  says  Paul,  as  all  Christians  must  know,  the  grace^  i.  e. 
the  unmerited,  spontaneous  love  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
A  combination  of  the  most  endearing  and  exalted  appella- 
tions. Our  JLord^  i.  e.  the  supreme  and  absolute  Lord  whom 
we  acknowledge  to  be  our  rightful  sovereign  and  possessor, 
and  who  is  oiirs^  belongs  to  us,  in  so  far  as  the  care,  protec- 
tion, and  support  of  his  almighty  power  are  by  his  love 
pledged  to  us.  Jesus  Christ.  He  who  is  our  Lord  is  our 
Saviour  and  the  Christ,  God's  anointed,  invested  by  Him  with 
supreme  dominion.  What  belongs  of  right  to  the  Logos  in 
virtue  of  his  divinity,  is  constantly  represented  as  given  to  the 
Theanthropos.  See  Heb.  1,  2.  That  though^  &q.  This  clause 
is  explanatory  of  the  former.  '  Ye  know  the  grace  of  our 
Lord  Jesus,'  that  is,  '  Ye  know  that  though  he  was  rich,  &c.' 
The  grace  consisted  in,  or  was  manifested  by  his  becoming 
poor  for  our  sakes.  Being  rich^  ttXovo-los  mv,  that  is,  either, 
as  in  our  version.  Though  he  was  rich,  in  the  possession  of  the 
glory  which  he  liad  with  the  Father  before  the  world  was, 
John  1 7,  5  ;  or,  Being  rich  in  the  actual  and  constant  posses- 
sion of  all  divine  prerogatives.     In  the  latter  case,  the  idea  is 


II.    CORINTHIANS   8,  10.  201 

tLat  our  blessed  Lord  while  here  on  earth,  although  he  had 
within  himself  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  and  the  right  and 
power  of  possession  over  all  things,  yet  was  poor.  He  did 
not  avail  himself  of  his  right  and  power  to  make  himself  rich, 
but  voluntarily  submitted  to  all  the  privations  of  poverty. 
I'he  former  interpretation  is  commonly  and  properly  preferred. 
The  reference  in  £7rT(o;)(€vo-€,  he  became  poor ^  is  not  to  what  our 
Cord  did  while  he  was  on  earth,  but  to  what  he  did  wlien  he 
came  into  the  world.  The  passage  is  parallel  to  Phil.  2,  6. 
"  Being  in  the  form  of  God,  and  equal  to  God,  he  emptied 
(cKcVojo-e)  himself."  That  is,  he  so  far  laid  aside  the  glory  of 
his  divine  majesty,  that  he  was  to  all  appearance  a  man,  and 
even  a  servant,  so  that  men  refused  to  recognise  him  as  God, 
but  despised,  persecuted,  and  at  last  crucified  him,  as  a  man. 
He  who  was  rich  in  the  plenitude  of  all  divine  attributes  and 
prerogatives  thus  became  poor,  hi  v/xa?,  on  your  account^  out 
of  love  to  you.  The  end  to  be  accomplished  by  this  humilia- 
tion of  the  Son  of  God,  was  that,  you  through  his  po-oerty 
anight  he  rich.  Believers  are  made  rich  in  the  possession  of 
that  glory  w^hich  Christ  laid  aside,  or  concealed.  They  are 
made  partakers  of  the  divine  nature,  2  Pet.  1,  4.  That  is,  of 
the  divine  holiness,  exaltation  and  blessedness.  This  is  divine 
not  only  because  of  its  source  as  coming  from  God,  but  be- 
cause of  its  nature.  So  that  our  Lord  says,  *'  The  glory  which 
thou  gavest  me,  I  have  given  them,"  John  17,  22.  Hence 
believers  are  said  to  be  glorified  with  Christ  and  to  reign  with 
him.  Rom.  8,  17.  The  price  of  this  exaltation  and  everlasting 
blessedness  of  his  people  was  his  own  poverty.  It  is  by  his 
poverty  that  we  are  made  rich.  Unless  he  had  submitted  to 
all  the  humiliation  of  his  incarnation  and  death,  \\e  should  for- 
ever have  remained  poor,  destitute  of  all  holiness,  happiness 
and  glory.  It  should  be  observed  that  moral  duties,  such  as 
almsgiving,  are  in  the  New  Testament  enforced  not  so  much 
on  moral  grounds  as  on  grounds  peculiarly  Christian.  No 
man  can  enter  into  the  meaning  of  this  verse  or  feel  its. power, 
without  being  thereby  made  willing  to  sacrifice  himself  for 
others.  And  the  apostle  teaches  here,  what  St.  John  also 
teaches,  1  John  3, 17,  that  it  is  vain  for  any  man  to  profess  or 
to  imagine  that  he  loves  Christ,  if  he  does  not  love  the  breth- 
ren and  is  not  hberal  in  relievinof  their  wants. 


10.  And  herein  I  give  (my)  advice :  for  this  is  ex- 


202  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  8. 

pedient  for  you,  who  have  begun  before,  not  only  to 
do,  but  also  to  be  forward  a  year  ago. 

The  connection  is  with  v.  8.  'I  do  not  command,  I,  in 
this  matter,  viz.,  in  making  collections  for  the  poor,  give  my 
mind ; »  yvo)ix7]v,  in  the  sense  of  opinion.  Comp.  1  Cor.  7,  6. 
J^or  this  is  expedient  Jvr  you.  This  admits  of  two  interpreta- 
tions, '  I  advise  you  to  make  the  collection,  for  this  giving  to 
the  poor  is  profitable  to  you.  It  not  only  promotes  your  own 
moral  growth,  but  it  is  demanded  by  consistency.  Having 
begun  this  work  it  would  be  an  injury  to  yourselves  to  leave 
it  unfinished.'  This  is  the  common,  and  on  the  whole  the 
preferable  explanation.  It  satisfies  all  the  demands  of  the 
context ;  and  it  makes  Iv  tovtw  and  toxtto  refer  to  the  same 
thing.  *  In  this  matter  (of  giving)  I  express  my  opinion,  for 
this  (giving)  is  profitable  to  you.'  Meyer,  Billroth  and  many 
others  make  tovto  refer  to  the  immediately  preceding  words. 
'  I  give  my  advice,  for  advising  is  better  than  commanding  in 
your  case,  seeing  ye  were  willing  a  year  ago.'  This,  however, 
is  not  demanded  by  the  context,  and  lowers  the  sense.  The 
former  interpretation  brings  out  a  higher  truth  than  the 
second.  It  is  for  our  own  good  to  do  good.  Who^  omi/es, 
(being  such  as  those  who.)  '  It  is  expedient  for  you,  because 
ye  began  before  not  only  to  do  {to  7roir)(Tat),  but  to  be  forward 
{to  •^iX.eiv)  a  year  ago.  As  the  will  precedes  the  deed,  many 
commentators  assume  an  inversion  in  these  words,  and  reverse 
their  order.  '  Ye  began  not  only  to  will,  but  to  do.'  This  is 
arbitrary  and  unnecessary.  Otliers,  as  do  our  translators, 
take  the  word  ^eAetv  in  an  emphatic  sense,  to  be  zealous  in 
doing.  Luke  20,  46.  John  8,  44.  '  Ye  began  not  only  to  do, 
but  to  do  with  zeal.'  Tliis,  however,  does  not  agree  with  the 
following  verse,  where  -^eXeiv  is  used  in  its  ordinary  sense. 
Others  again  understand  irovqa-ai  of  the  beginning  of  the  work, 
and  the  ^ikeiv  of  the  purpose  to  do  more.  But  this  requires 
much  to  be  supplied  which  is  not  in  the  text.  Besides  it  does 
not  agree  with  the  qualifying  clause  'a year  ago.'  According  to 
this  explanation  the  SeXecv  does  not  express  what  had  occurred 
a  year  ago,  but  to  the  state  of  mind  now  assumed  to  exist  and 
subsequent  to  the  doing  begun  the  year  before.  De  Wette, 
Winer,  and  Meyer  give  a  much  more  natural  interpretation. 
The  word  irpoivi^piaa-^e,  as  in  v.  6,  refers  to  the  Macedonian 
churches.  '  You  anticipated  the  Macedonians  not  only  in  the 
work  but  in  the  purpose.'     That  is,  before  they  had  begun  to 


II.    CORHSTTHIANS    8,  11.  12.  203 

make  a  collection  for  the  poor  saints,  you  had  begun ;  and 
before  they  thought  of  it,  you  had  determined  to  do  it.  '  Hav- 
ing  thus  been  beforehand  with  them  it  would  be  to  your  di.s- 
advantage  to  leave  your  work  half  done,  seeing  that  the  mere 
mention  of  your  purjDose,  9,  2,  roused  them  to  such  self-deny- 
ing liberality.'  A  year  ago^  [ano  iripvai.)  This  does  not 
imply  that  a  whole  year  had  intervened,  but  is  analogous  to 
our  popular  expression  last  year.  If  Paul,  according  to  the 
Jewish  reckoning,  began  the  year  in  October,  he  could  prop- 
erly speak,  when  writing  in  November,  of  an  event  which 
happened  in  the  spring,  as  having  occurred  last  year.  An  in- 
terval of  little  more  than  six  months,  according  to  this  view, 
from  spring  to  fall,  intervened  between  the  date  of  the  first 
and  second  epistles  of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians. 

11.  Now  therefore  perform  the  doing  (of  it) :  that 
as  (there  was)  a  readiness  to  will,  so  (there  may  be)  a 
performance  also  out  of  that  which  ye  have. 

Kow  therefore^  i.  e.  as  there  has  been  the  purpose  and  the 
commencement,  let  there  be  also  the  completion  of  the  work. 
Literally,  conir^lete  ye  also  the  doing.  That^  (o-o;?,  in  order 
that,)  as  the  readiness  to  loill^  so  also  the  completion.  Con- 
sistency required  them  to  carry  out  their  good  intentions 
openly  expressed.  Out  of  that  vmich  ye  have.,  Ik  tov  ex^cv,  ac- 
cording to  (your)  property.  The  preposition  ck  is  not  here  to 
be  rendered  out  of,  but  it  expresses  the  rule  or  standard. 
Compare  John  3,  34.  The  apostle  was  not  desirous  to  urge 
them  either  beyond  their  inclination,  or  beyond  their  ability. 
What  they  gave,  he  wished  them  to  give  freely,  and  wdth  due 
resiard  to  their  resources. 


^^v 


12.  For  if  there  be  first  a  willing  mind,  (it  is)  ac- 
cepted according  to  that  a  man  hath,  (and)  not  accord- 
ing to  that  he  hath  not. 

The  connection  is  evidently  with  the  last  words  of  y.  11. 
They  were  to  give  according  to  their  property, /br  the  stand- 
ard of  judgment  with  God  is  the  disposition,  not  the  amount 
given.  The  same  doctrine  is  taught  by  our  Lord,  Mark  12, 
42.  ^  there  he  firsts  literally,  if  there  he  present ;  TrpoKurai 
does  not  mean  prius  adest^  but   simply  adest.     tA.   willing 


204  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  13. 

mind^  rj  TrpoSvfXLa^  the  readiness,  or,  disposition.  It  is ;  that 
is,  the  Trpo^^vjXLa  (the  disposition)  is  acce^yted,  €V7rp6aS€KTo<;,  ac- 
ceptdble.  It  is  often  used  in  reference  to  offerings  made  to 
God.  Rom.  15,  16.  1  Pet.  2,  5.  Some  of  the  ancient  MSS. 
introduce  the  indefinite  pronoun  rts,  as  the  subject  of  the 
verbs  c^r;  and  ex^t,  so  our  translators  insert  man,  '  according 
to  that  a  man  hath,  and  not  according  to  that  he  hath  not.' 
The  grammatical  subject,  hovv^ever,  of  all  the  verbs  in  the 
verse  is  TrpoSvfxca,  which  Paul,  according  to  his  custom,  per- 
sonifies, and  therefore  says,  It  is  acceptable  according  to  that 
it  may  have,  (eaj/  lyy}^  be  it  more  or  less ;  not  according  to 
that  it  hath  not.  This  does  not  mean  that  the  disposition  is 
not  acceptable  when  it  exceeds  the  ability  to  give,  or  leads  to 
extravagant  gifts.  This  may  be  true,  but  it  is  not  the  idea 
l^ere  intended.  The  meaning  is  simply  that  the  disposition  is 
what  God  regards,  and  that  disposition  will  be  judged  of  ac- 
cording to  the  resources  at  its  command.  A  small  gift  may 
manifest  in  one  case  much  greater  willingness  to  give,  than  a 
much  larger  gift  in  another. 

13.  For  (I  mean)  not  that  other  men  be  eased,  and 

you  burdened. 

The  reason  why  he  did  not  wish  them  to  exceed  their 
ability  in  giving,  is  here  stated  negatively.  The  positive 
statement  follows  in  the  next  verse.  The  apostle  did  not 
wish  to  throw  an  unequal  burden  upon  the  Corinthians.  He 
did  not  desire  that  others  should  be  released  from  all  obliga- 
tion to  give,  and  they  oppressed  by  it.  Not  to  others  ai/ecrts 
(relief),  and  to  you  ^A.ti//ts  (oppression),  is  his  concise  expres- 
sion. According  to  this  view,  by  akXacq,  others,  we  are  to 
understand  other  churches  or  Christians;  and  by  avco-is,  relief 
from  the  obligation  to  give.  But  this  is  consistent  neither 
with  what  precedes  nor  with  what  follows.  The  equality 
which  he  aims  at,  is  not  the  equality  of  the  churches  in  giving, 
but  that  which  arises  from  the  deficiency  of  one  class  being 
made  up  by  the  abundance  of  another.  By  others,  therefore, 
we  must  understand  the  poor,  and  in  this  case,  the  poor  saints 
at  Jerusalem,  and  by  ai'ccrts  release  from  the  pressure  of 
poverty,  and  by  ^Aii/zts  the  burden  of  indigence.  The  mean- 
ing therefore  is,  that  Paul  did  not  desire  that  the  Corinthians 
should  go  beyond  their  ability  in  giving,  for  he  had  no  wish 
that  others  should  be  enriched,  and  they  impoverished.     It  is 


II.    CORINTHIANS   8,  14.  205 

not  obligatory  on  the  rich  to  make  themselves  poor  in  order 
that  the  poor  may  be  rich.     That  is  not  the  rule. 

14.  But  by  an  equality,  (that)  now  at  this  time 
your  abundance  (may  be  a  supply)  for  their  want,  that 
their  abundance  also  may  be  (a  supply)  for  your  want : 
that  there  may  be  equality. 

The  word  io-ott^s  means  here  neither  reciprocity  nor  equity, 
but  equality,  as  the  illustration  in  v.  15  shows.  The  eK,  as  in 
V.  11,  {eK  Tov  ex^ti^,)  expresses  the  rule  or  standard  in  giving. 
That  rule  is  equality ;  we  must  give  so  as  to  produce,  or  that 
there  may  be,  equality.  This  is  not  agrarianism,  nor  commu- 
nity of  goods.  The  Xew  Testament  teaches  on  this  subject, 
1.  That  all  giving  is  voluntary.  A  man's  property  is  his  own. 
It  is  in  his  own  power  to  retain  or  to  give  away ;  and  if  he 
gives,  it  is  his  prerogative  to  decide  whether  it  shall  be  much 
or  little.  Acts  5,  4.  This  is  the  doctrine  taught  in  this  whole 
connection.  Giving  must  be  voluntary.  It  is  the  fruit  of 
love.  It  is  of  course  obligatory  as  a  moral  duty,  and  the  in- 
dis-position  to  give  is  proof  of  the  absence  of  the  love  of  God. 
1  John  3,  17.  Still  it  is  one  of  those  duties  the  performance 
of  which  others  cannot  enforce  a«  g.  right  belonging  to  them. 
It  must  remain  at  our  own  discretioi^.  2.  That  the  end  to  be 
accomplished  by  giving  is  relieving  the  necessities  of  the  poor. 
The  equality,  therefore,  aimed  at,  or  intended,  is  not  an 
equality  as  to  the  amount  of  property,  but  equal  relief  from 
the  burden  of  want.  This  is  taught  in  the  remainder  of  this 
verse.  'At  the  present  time,'  says  the  apostle,  'let  your 
abundance  be  to  {yevrjTaL  et?,  extend  to,  be  imparted  to.  Gal, 
3,  14,)  their  want,  in  order  that  their  abundance  may  be  to 
your  want,  that  there  may  be  equality;'  that  is,  an  equal 
relief  from  want  or  destitution.  3.  A  third  scriptural  princi- 
ple on  this  subject  is,  that  while  all  men  are  brethren,  and  the 
poor  as  poor,  whether  Christians  or  not,  are  the  proper  objects 
of  charity,  yet  there  is  a  special  obhgation  resting  on  the 
members  of  Christ  to  relieve  the  wants  of  their  fellow-believ- 
ers. We  are  to  do  good  to  all  men,  says  the  apostle,  special- 
ly to  those  who  are  of  the  household  of  faith.  Gal.  6,  10.  All 
the  directions  in  this  and  the  following  chapter  have  reference 
to  the  duty  of  Christians  to  their  fellow-behevers.  There  are 
two  reasons  for  this.     The  one  is  the  common  relation  of  be- 


206  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  15.  16. 

lievers  to  Christ  as  members  of  his  body,  so  that  what  is  done 
to  them  is  clone  to  him  ;  and  their  consequent  intimate  relation 
to  ea(;h  other  as  being  one  body  in  Christ  Jesus.  The  other 
is,  the  assurance  that  the  good  done  to  theiii  is  pure  good. 
There  is  no  apprehension  that  the  ahns  bestowed  will  encour- 
ao-e  idleness  or  vice.  3.  A  fourth  rule  is  designed  to  prevent 
any  abuse  of  the  brotherhood  of  Christians.  The  poor  have 
no  right  to  depend  on  the  benefactions  of  the  rich  because 
they  are  brethren.  This  same  apostle  says,  "This  we  com- 
manded you,  that  if  any  man  would  not  work,  neither  should 
he  eat,"  2  Thess.  3,  10.  Thus  do  the  Scriptures  avoid,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  injustice  and  destructive  evils  of  agrarian  com- 
munism, by  recognising  the  right  of  property  and  making  all 
almsgiving  optional ;  and  on  the  other,  the  heartless  disregard 
of  the  poor  by  inculcating  the  universal  brotherhood  of  be- 
lievers, and  the  consequent  duty  of  each  to  contribute  of  his 
abundance  to  relieve  the  necessities  of  the  poor.  At  the  same 
time  they  inculcate  on  the  poor  the  duty  of  self-support  to  the 
extent  of  their  ability.  They  are  commanded  "  with  quietness 
to  work,  and  to  eat  their  own  bread."  Could  these  principles 
be  carried  out  there  would  be  among  Christians  neither  idle- 
ness nor  want. 

15.  As  it  is  written,  He  that  (had  gathered)  much 
had  nothing  over;  and  he  that  (had  gathered)  little 
had  no  lack. 

The  moral  lesson  taught  in  Exodus  16,  18,  is  that  which 
the  apostle  had  just  inculcated.  There  it  is  recorded  that  the 
people,  by  the  command  of  God,  gathered  of  the  manna  an 
omer  for  each  person.  Those  who  gathered  more  retained 
only  the  allotted  portion ;  and  those  who  gathered  less  had 
their  portion  increased  to  the  given  standard.  There  was  as 
to  the  matter  of  necessary  food  an  equality.  If  any  one  at- 
tempted to  hoard  his  portion,  it  spoiled  upon  liis  hands.  The 
lesson  therefore  taught  in  Exodus  and  by  Paul  is,  that,  among 
the  people  of  God,  the  superabundance  of  one  sliould  be  em- 
ployed in  relieving  the  necessities  of  others ;  and  that  any  at- 
tempt to  countervail  this  law  will  result  in  shame  and  loss. 
Property  is  like  manna,  it  will  n'»t  bear  hoarding. 

16.  But  thanks  (be)  to  God,  which  put  the  same 
earnest  care  into  the  heart  of  Titus  for  you. 


II.  CORINTHIANS   8,  17.  20*? 

From  this  verse  to  the  end  of  the  chapter  the  apostle 
commends  to  the  confidence  of  the  Corinthians  Titus  and  the 
two  brethren  who  were  to  accompany  him  on  his  return  to 
Corinth.  The  object  of  Titus's  first  visit  was  to  ascertain  the 
state  of  the  church,  and  specially  the  effect  of  Paul's  former 
e].>ist]e.  The  object  of  this  mission  was  to  bring  to  an  end 
tlic  collection  for  the  poor  which  the  Corinthians  had  so  long 
under  consideration.  Titus  had  as  much  zeal  in  this  matter 
as  Paul,  and  therefore  the  apostle  thanks  God  ichich  put  into 
the  heart  of  Titus  ;  rw  StSovrt  cV,  '  Thanks  to  God  giving  in, 
i.  e.  giving  to  be  in,  the  heart  of  Titus.'  The  same  earnest 
care  for  you  j  rrjv  avr-qv  (TTTovS-^v,  the  same  zeal,  i.  e.  the  same 
zeal  which  I  have  for  you.  Titus  felt  the  same  interest  in  the 
spirtual  welfare  of  the  Corinthians,  and  the  same  solicitude 
that  they  should  act  consistently,  that  Paul  had  so  warmly 
ex])ressed  in  the  foregoing  verses.  Often,  as  the  occasion  ot- 
fer>5-,  it  is  still  well  to  notice  how  uniformly  the  Scriptures  take 
for  granted  two  great  fundamental  truths  which  human  phi- 
losophy  finds  it  hard  to  comprehend  or  to  admit.  The  one  is 
that  God  can  and  does  control  the  inward  acts  and  feehngs  of 
men  without  interfering  either  with  their  liberty  or  responsi- 
bihty.  The  zeal  of  Titus  was  the  spontaneous  effusion  of  his 
own  heart  and  was  an  index  and  element  of  his  character. 
Yet  God  put  that  zeal  into  his  heart.  This  is  not  a  figure  of 
speech.  It  was  a  simple  and  serious  truth,  a  ground  of  solemn 
thanksgiving  to  God.  The  other  great  truth  is  that  the  be- 
liever is  dependent  on  God  for  the  continuance  and  exercise 
of  spiritual  Hfe.  The  Holy  Spirit  does  not  regenerate  the  soul 
by  implanting  in  it  a  new  principle  of  life,  and  then  leave  that 
principle  to  struggle  in  its  own  strength  for  existence  and 
growth.  On  the  contrary,  the  new  birth  is  the  beginning  of 
a  constant  indwelUng  of  God  in  the  soul,  so  that  both  the 
continuance  and  exercise  of  this  new  life  are  due  to  his  pres- 
ence. Yet  so  congenial  and  congruous  is  this  divine  influence 
that  the  life  of  God  in  us  is  in  the  highest  sense  our  own  hfe. 

17.  For  indeed  he  accepted  the  exhortation;  but 
being  more  forward,  of  his  own  accord  he  Avent  unto 
you. 

This  is  the  proof  of  the  zeal  of  Titus.  Some  commentators 
assume  that  /xeV  and  Se  are  here  used  instead  of  ov  ixovov — a^\a, 
*  Not  only  did  he  listen  to  our  exhortation,  but  fulfilled  it  with 


208  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  18.  19. 

greater  zeal  as  he  went  forth  willingly.'  But  Meyer  gives  a 
better  explanation.  'He  accepted  indeed  our  exhortation, 
i.  e.  he  modestly  submitted  himself  to  my  direction,  but  being 
too  zealous  (o-TroroatoTepo?)  to  need  an  exhortation,  he  went  of 
his  own  accord.'  He  did  not  require  to  be  urged  to  go,  al- 
though in  this,  as  in  other  matters,  he  was  willing  to  do  as  I 
wished.  He  icent  unto  you.  Titus  was  no  doubt  the  bearer 
of  this  epistle,  and  was  with  the  apostle  when  it  was  written. 
He  had  not  yet  gone  forth.  In  epistolary  style  the  writer 
may  use  the  tense  suited  to  his  own  position,  or  to  that  of  his 
readers.  Paul  here,  and  in  the  following  verses,  uses  the  past 
tense,  because  when  his  epistle  came  to  hand  the  events  re- 
ferred to  would  be  past. 

18.  And  we  have  sent  with  hhn  the  brother,  whose 
praise  (is)  in  the  gospel  throughout  all  the  churches. 

We  have  sent.  The  time  is  from  the  stand-point  of  the 
reader,  as  before.  We  send  icith  him  the  brother.  As  the 
name  is  not  given,  and  as  no  data  are  furnished  by  which  to 
determine  who  the  brother  here  mentioned  was,  it  is  useless 
to  conjecture.  It  was  some  one  subordinate  to  Titus  sent 
with  him  as  a  companion,  some  one  well  known  throughout 
the  churches,  and  who  had  es2:)ecially  the  confidence  of  the 
Macedonian  Christians,  v.  19.  But  these  conditions  meet  in 
so  many  of  the  persons  mentioned  in  the  Acts  or  Paul's  epis- 
tles that  they  lead  to  no  certain  conclusion.  AYhether,  there- 
fore, it  v/as  Luke,  Mark,  Trophimus,  or  some  one  else,  must  be 
eft  undecided.  The  question  is  hardly  worth  the  trouble 
which  commentators  have  devoted  to  it.  This  brother's 
praise  is  said  to  have  been  in  the  gospel.  He  was  distin- 
guished by  his  efforts  in  that  sphere ;  that  is,  by  his  zeal  and 
labour  in  promoting  the  gospel.  Through  all  the  churches. 
If  this  be  taken  with  the  limitation  of  all  the  churches  of 
rVIacedonia,  it  still  is  evidence  that  the  brother  referred  to  was 
specially  entitled  to  the  confidence  of  the  Corinthians. 

19.  And  not  (that)  only,  but  who  was  also  chosen 
of  the  churches  to  travel  with  us  with  this  grace,  which 
is  administered  by  us  to  the  glory  of  the  same  Lord, 
and  (declaration  of)  your  ready  mind. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  19.  209 

This  brother  was  entitled  to  confidence,  and  might  safely 
be  intrusted  with  the  contributions  of  the  Corinthians,  not 
only  on  the  ground  of  his  general  reputation,  but  also  because 
he  had  been  elected  for  the  very  purpose  of  taking  charge, 
together  with  Paul,  of  the  money  collected  for  the  saints. 
Chosen^  X^tporovT^^ets,  literally,  chosen  by  the  stretching  out 
the  hand,  therefore  popularly.  The  word,  however,  is  con- 
stantly used  for  selection  or  appointment  without  reference  to 
the  mode.  Thus  Josephus  speaks  of  the  king  as  having  been 
vTTo  rov  ^eov  Kc^j^ctpoTovi^/o.eVos.  Ant.  vi.  4.  2.  See  Wetstein.  Of 
the  churches^  probably  by  the  churches  of  Macedonia.  To 
travel  with  us,  avv€KBr]ixo<;  rj/jLihv,  i.  e.  elected  our  travelling  com- 
panion. Acts  19,  29.  With  this  grace.  The  word  x^P'-^  means 
either  the  disposition,  or  that  which  is  its  expression  or  mani- 
festation, i.  e.  either  kindness  or  a  kindness.  Any  free  gift  is 
therefore  a  grace.  Here  the  grace  mtended  is  the  alms  col- 
lected for  the  poor.  WTiich  is  ministered  by  us,  i.  e.  of  which 
we  are  the  administrators.  Paul  had  undertaken  to  adminis- 
ter the  benefactions  of  the  Gentile  Christians  among  the 
brethren  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  brother  referred  to  had  been 
chosen  to  travel  with  him  and  assist  him  in  this  service  or 
ministry.  To  the  glory  of  the  same  Lord,  i.  e.  of  our  common 
Lord.  The  natural  construction  of  this  clause  is  with  the  im- 
mediately preceding  words.  '  This  gift  is  administered  by  us 
to  the  glory  of  the  Lord.'  The  only  objection  to  this  is  that 
it  requires  the  preposition  tt/oo's  to  be  taken  as  expressing  dif- 
ferent relations  in  the  same  sentence.  'Administered  Trpos 
So^av  ....  KoX  TrpoSvixtav  vjjlwv  (or,  rjjxwv),  i.  e.  to  promote  the 
glory  of  the  Lord  and  to  prove  your  readiness.'  Meyer  and 
others  therefore  refer  the  clause  to  x^'-porovq&d'i ;  '  chosen  that 
by  his  co-operation  Christ  may  be  honoured  and  my  {rjixdv) 
readiness  to  labour  in  the  gospel,  unincumbered  by  such  cares, 
may  have  free  scope.'  But  this  is  unnatural,  and  suj)poses  too 
much  to  be  supplied  to  make  out  the  sense.  If  the  common 
text,  which  reads  vfxoiv,  be  retained,  the  sense  is  plain  as  ex- 
pressed in  our  version.  '  The  ministration  of  this  gift  is  for 
the  manifestation  of  the  glory  of  Christ  and  of  your  readiness 
or  alacrity  (in  giving).'  The  oldest  manuscripts  as  well  as 
the  ancient  versions,  however,  read  ly/xoov,  which  almost  all  the 
modern  editors  adopt.  The  sense  then  is,  that  the  gift  served 
to  promote  the  glory  of  Christ  and  to  prove  the  apostle's  will< 
jnofuess  to  serve  the  poor. 


210  II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  20-22. 

20.  Avoiding  this,  that  no  man  should  blame  us  in 
this  abimdance  which  is  administered  by  us. 

The  participle  crreXXofxcvoi  depends  on  the  verb  a-vv^irijxxl/afxev 
of  the  verse  18.  'We  sent  the  brother  with  Titus,  avoiding 
tliis ; '  tliat  is,  in  order  to  avoid.  It  was  not,  however,  merely 
the  appointment  of  a  brother  to  accompany  Titus,  but  also 
the  designation  of  that  brother  to  take  part  in  the  distribution 
of  the  alms  of  the  churches  that  Paul  had  determined  upon  in 
order  to  prevent  misrepresentation.  The  reference  is  there- 
fore to  the  whole  preceding  sentence.  The  word  o-reAAeiv, 
literally,  to  place,  means  also  to  set  in  order,  to  prepare,  a 
sense  which  some  adopt  here.  ' Preparing  for,  taking  caie 
with  regard  to,  this.'  The  word  also  means  to  withdraw,  to 
contract,  and  hence  to  avoid,  which  best  suits  this  place  as 
well  as  2  Thess.  3,  6,  where  the  word  also  occurs.  Lest  any 
one  should  blame  tis.  He  was  determined  not  to  give  any 
one  the  opportunity  to  call  his  integrity  into  question.  In 
this  abundance  lohich  is  administered  hy  us  /  i.  e.  in  the  dis- 
position of  the  large  sums  of  money  committed  to  his  charge. 
The  word  aSpdr^^s  means  ripeness,  fulness,  and  then  abundance ; 
the  nature  of  which  is  of  course  determined  by  the  context. 

21.  Providing  for  honest  things,  not  only  in  the 
sight  of  the  Lord,  but  also  in  the  sight  of  men. 

This  gives  the  reason  for  the  precaution  just  mentioned. 
It  was  not  enough  for  the  apostle  to  do  right,  he  recognised 
the  importance  of  appearing  right.  It  is  a  foolish  pride  which 
leads  to  a  disregard  of  public  opinion.  We  are  bound  to  act 
in  such  a  way  that  not  only  God,  who  sees  the  heart  and 
knows  all  things,  may  approve  our  conduct,  but  also  so  that 
men  may  be  constrained  to  recognise  our  integrity.  It  is  a 
general  principle  regulating  his  whole  life  which  the  apostle 
here  announces.  Ilpovooi;/x€vo9,  ^9ro?;/c//??<7/br  in  one'^s  vion  be- 
half.  The  apostle  says.  He  took  care  beforehand  that  rai'n  :i8 
well  as  God  should  see  that  he  was  honest  Compare  Rom. 
12,  17,  and  Prov.  3,  4,  in  the  LXX. 

22.  And  we   have  sent  with  them  om'  brother, 
whom  we  have  oftentimes  proved  diligent  in  many 


II.   CORINTHIANS   8,  23.  211 

things,  but  now  mucli  more  diligent,  upon  the  great 
confidence  which  (I  have)  in  you. 

Who  this  second  brother  was  whom  Paul  sent  to  accooi- 
pany  Titus  and  his  fellow-traveller,  there  is  no  means  of  deter- 
mining. The  apostle  had  proved  him  to  be  o-TrovSator,  earnest 
or  diligent,  iv  TroXAots  TroAAaKts,  in  many  things  many  times 
£ut  now,  i.  e.  on  this  occasion,  much  more  diligent  or  earnest 
His  zeal  and  alacrity  was  greatly  excited  hy  the  confidence 
which  he  has  in  regard  to  you.  He  was  so  assured  of  success 
that  he  entered  on  his  mission  with  the  greatest  earnestness. 
This  interpretation,  which  most  commentators  adopt,  and 
which  in  our  English  Bibles  is  suggested  in  the  margin,  is 
more  natural  than  that  preferred  by  Calvin,  Beza  and  others. 
They  connect  the  word  TT^-Koi^y]<j(.i  with  o-weTrc/xi/za/xev,  '  We 
sent  the  brother  with  them  ;  ...  on  account  of  the  confidence 
we  have  in  you.'  This,  however,  was  not  the  reason  for  the 
mission ;  nor  does  it  suit  the  context  to  say,  '  we  sent  liim  Avith 
confidence.'  The  position  of  the  words  is  in  favour  of  the 
explanation  first  mentioned. 

23.  Whether  (any  do  inquire)  of  Titus,  (he  is)  my 
partner  and  fellow-helper  concerning  you :  or  our  breth- 
ren (be  inquired  of,  they  are)  the  messengers  of  the 
churches,  (and)  the  glory  of  Christ. 

This  is  a  recapitulation,  or  summary  commendation.  The 
language  in  the  original  is  very  concise.  Whether  concerning 
Titus,  i.  e.  whether  I  speak  of  Titus ;  or.  Whether  any  do  in- 
quire concerning  Titus;  or,  without  supplying  any  thing,  'As 
to  Titus.'  He  is  nfiy  partner,  /cotvwvo?,  my  associate,  one  who 
has  a  part  with  me  in  a  common  ministry.  And,  specially, 
as  concerns  you  my  fellow-laborer  (o-wepyos).  Whether  our 
brethre7i,  (they  are)  the  m,essengers  (aTrdo-roAot)  of  the  churches. 
The  word  apostle  is  here  obviously  used  in  its  literal,  and  not 
in  its  ofiicial  sense.  These  men  were  surely  not  apostles  in 
the  sense  in  which  Paul  was.  In  like  manner,  in  Phil.  2,  25, 
Epaphroditus  is  called  the  apostle  of  the  Philippians,  because 
he  was  their  messenger  sent  to  minister  to  Paul  at  Rome. 
Both  the  brethren,  therefore,  above  mentioned,  and  not  only 
the  one  of  whom  it  is  said  specially  that  he  was  chosen  by  the 
churches,  were  delegated  by  the  people.  They  are  further 
laid  to  be  the  glory  of  Christ.     As  Christ  alone,  says  Calvin, 


212  II.   CORINTHIANS   9. 

is  the  glory  of  believers,  so  he  is  glorified  by  th(?m.  They 
reflect  his  glory.  They  by  their  holiness  lead  men  to  see  the 
excellence  of  Christ  whose  image  they  bear. 

24.  Wherefore  shew  ye  to  them,  and  before  the 
churches,  the  proof  of  your  love,  and  of  our  boasting 
on  your  behalf. 

In  conclusion  the  apostle  exhorts  the  Corinthians  to  prove 
to  these  messengers  so  worthy  of  their  confidence  their  love, 
and  the  truth  of  the  favourable  testimony  which  he  had  borne 
to  their  liberality.  Shoio  the  proof  (Trjv  eVSei^tv  .  .  ei/Set^ao-^f) 
of  your  love.  This  may  mean,  'your  love  to  me;'  or,  'your 
Christian  love ; '  or,  as  is  most  natural,  '  your  love  to  them.' 
Give  them  evidence  of  your  love,  i.  e.  receive  them  with  affec- 
tionate confidence ;  and  let  them  see  that  my  boasting  of  you 
was  true.  Before  the  churches  ;  that  is,  so  that  the  churches, 
by  whom  these  brethren  were  sent,  may  see  the  proof  of  your 
love.  Instead  of  the  received  text,  which  has  the  imperative 
ivScciaa-'^,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer  and  others,  after 
the  older  MSS.,  read  ivSeLKvvfxevoi.  '  Exhibiting  the  evidence 
of  your  love,  <fec.,  (do  it)  in  the  presence  of  the  churches.' 
This  whole  chapter  proves  how  intimately  the  early  Christians 
were  bound  together,  not  only  from  the  intercourse  here 
shown  to  exist  between  the  several  churches,  but  from  the 
influence  which  they  exerted  over  each  other,  from  their 
brotherly  love  and  sympathy,  and  from  the  responsibility 
which  each  is  assumed  to  owe  to  the  judgment  of  the  others. 


CHAPTER   IX. 


An  exhortation  to  the  Corinthians  not  to  falsify  his  boasting  of  their  hberal- 
ity,  vs.  1-5.  An  exhortation  to  give  not  only  liberally  but  cheerfully, 
vs.  6-15. 

Continuation  of  the  discourse  in  the  preceding  chapter  on 
makiiig  collections  for  the  saints. 

Although  aware  of  their  readiness,  the  apostle  sent  tlie 
brethren  to  bring  the  collection  for  the  poor  to  an  end,  lest 
when  the  Macedonians  who  were  to  accompany  him  to  Cor 


II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  1.  21S 

Inth  arrived,  they  should  find  them  unprepared,  not  po  much 
to  their  disgrace,  as  to  his  mortiHcation,  vs.  1-4.  He  sent  the 
brethren,  therefore,  that  every  thing  they  intended  to  do 
might  be  done  in  time,  and  be  done  cheeniilly,  v.  5.  It  was 
not  only  liberality,  but  cheerfulness  in  giving  that  the  Lord 
required,  vs.  6.  7.  God  who  commanded  them  to  give  could 
and  would  supply  their  wants,  and  increase  their  graces. 
They  would  be  the  richer  and  the  better  for  what  they  gave, 
vs.  8-10.  What  he  had  at  heart  was  not  so  much  that  the 
temporal  sufierings  of  the  poor  should  be  relieved,  as  that  God 
might  be  glorified  by  the  gratitude  and  mutual  love  of  believ- 
ers, and  by  the  exhibition  of  their  Christian  graces,  vs.  10-14. 
What  are  our  gifts  to  the  poor  compared  to  the  gift  of  Christ 
to  us?  V.  15. 

1.  For  as  touching  the  ministering  to  the  saints,  it 
is  superfluous  for  me  to  write  to  you. 

This  is  not  a  new  paragraph,  much  less,  as  some  have  con- 
jectured, a  separate  writing.  It  is  intimately  connected  with 
the  preceding.  In  the  last  verse  of  chapter  8,  he  exhorted  them 
to  receive  the  brethren  with  confidence,  ^/br  indeed  it  is  super- 
fluous to  write  about  the  collection.  He  exhorted  them  to 
show  their  love  to  the  brethren  who  were  to  visit  them>  for 
they  needed  no  exhortation  to  liberality.  This  is  another  of 
those  exhibitions  of  urbanity  and  rhetorical  skill  with  which 
the  epistles  of  Paul  abounds.  The  3e  answering  to  the  ^iv  of 
this  verse  is  by  some  said  to  be  found  in  verse  3.  '  It  is  not 
necessary  indeed  to  write,  hut  I  send,  tfec'  Or,  if  the  connec- 
tion between  vs.  2  and  3  forbid  this,  the  ix.iv  may  be  taken  as 
standing  alone,  as  in  1  Cor.  5,  3.  11,  18.  So  De  Wette.  Con- 
cerning  the  ministering  {-rrepl  r^s  StaKovtas.)  The  word  is  often 
used  not  only  for  the  ministry  of  the  word,  but  also  for  the 
service  rendered  in  the  collection  and  distribution  of  alms. 
Acts  6,1.  12,25.  Rom.  15,  31.  To  the  saints.  All  believers 
are  called  aytot  in  the  sense  of  sacred,  i.  e.  separated  from  the 
world  and  consecrated  to  God,  and  as  inwardly  renewed  and 
purified  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  8,  4.  Acts  9,  13.  Rom.  1,  7.  8,  27. 
The  saints  referred  to  were  of  course  the  poor  believers  in 
Jerusalem  for  whose  benefit  Paul  instituted  tiiis  collection  in 
the  several  churches  which  he  had  founded.  1  Cor.  16,  1-3. 
Zt  is  superfluous  Jvr  me  (Treptcrcroi/  yuot  eo-rt)  to  icrite  (to  ypaf^etr, 

the  infiiiitive  has  the  article  because  it  is  the  subject  of  th© 


214  II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  2. 

sentence)  unto  you.  Paul  had  written  and  was  about  to  wiite 
still  farther  on  the  subject ;  so  that  this  is  to  be  understood  as 
only  a  polite  intimation  that  his  writing,  so  far  as  they  were 
concerned,  was  not  necessary.     They  did  not  need  urging. 

2.  Por  I  know  the  forwardness  of  your  mind,  for 
which  I  boast  of  you  to  them  of  Macedonia,  that  Achaia 
was  ready  a  year  ago ;  and  your  zeal  hath  provoked 
very  many. 

The  reason  why  it  was  superfluous  to  write  to  them  was 
that  they  were  disposed  to  act  spontaneously.  The  apostle 
says  he  knew  their  foricardiiess  of  mincl^  (irpo%ixiav,)  their 
readiness  or  disposition  to  give.  For  which  I  boast  (rjv  Kav- 
Xuiixai,  see  11,  30  for  the  same  construction)  of  you  (virep  vixcov^ 
for  you,  to  your  advantage).  Their  readiness  to  give  was  a 
matter  of  which  Paul  at  that  time  boasted  to  the  Macedonians 
among  whom  he  then  was.  This  does  not  imply  that  the 
apostle  regarded  their  liberal  disposition  an  honour  to  himself, 
as  though  it  owed  its  existence  to  his  agency.  We  are  said 
to  boast  of  the  good  qualities  of  a  friend  when  we  proclaim 
them  to  his  honour  and  not  our  own.  That  Achaia  was 
ready  a  year  ago.  This  was  Paul's  boast,  All  the  Christians 
in  Achaia  belonged  to  the  church  in  Corinth,  although  they 
did  not  all  reside  in  that  city.  See  1,  1.  Was  ready,  i.  e.  to 
take  part  in  a  collection  for  the  saints.  He  does  not  mean 
that  the  collection  had  already  been  completed,  so  that  nothing 
remained  to  be  done.  The  context  does  not  justify  the  dis- 
paraging supposition  that  Paul,  to  excite  the  emulation  of  the 
Macedonian  Christians,  had  ovei'stated  the  tact  as  to  the  Corin- 
thians, representing  them  as  having  already  a  year  ago  made 
their  collection.  The  reddmess  to  which  he  here  refers  is  the 
readiness  of  purpose.  They  were  fully  prepared  to  take  part 
in  the  work.  Others  say  the  apostle  had  told  the  Macedoni- 
ans that  the  Corinthians  had  made  their  collection  and  were 
ready  to  hand  over  the  money.  Those  who  have  sufficient 
respect  for  themselves  not  to  speak  disrespectfully  of  the 
apostle,  say  that  he  truly  believed  this  to  be  the  fact,  and  Mas 
now  solicitous  that  the  Corinthians  should  not  falsify  his  asser. 
tion  by  being  unprepared.  Others,  however,  as  Ruckert,  (and 
in  a  measure  De  Wette,)  represent  the  apostle  as  dishonestly 
telling  to  the  Macedonians  that  the  Corinthians  had  made 


II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  3.  215 

their  collection,  and  now  to  save  his  credit,  he  begged  the 
latter  to  finish  the  work  before  he  and  his  Macedonian  friends 
arrived.  The  whole  body  of  Paul's  epistles  is  a  refutation  of 
this  interpretation.  No  man  who  is  capable  of  receiving  the 
true  impress  of  his  exalted  character  can  suj^pose  him  guilty 
of  false  statement  or  duplicity.  What  he  told  the  Macedoni- 
ans was  simply  that  the  Corinthians  loere  prepared.  What 
preparation  is  meant  is  plain  from  the  context.  It  consisted 
in  their  Trpo^/xta,  their  alacrity  of  mind  to  take  part  in  the 
work.  A  year  ago^  8,  10.  And  your  zeal,  i.  e.  your  7rpo^v/xia, 
alacrity,  in  this  business.  The  words  are  6  e^  v/xtov  ^17X09,  where 
the  Ik  may  be  considered  redundant,  as  our  translators  have 
assumed  it  to  be ;  or,  it  may  be  omitted  from  the  text,  as  by 
Lachmann ;  or,  the  meaning  is,  the  zeal  which  emanated  from 
you.  This  last  is  to  be  preferred.  Hath  provoked.  The 
word  epe^i^etv  means  to  excite,  whether  the  feeling  called  into 
exercise  be  good  or  bad.  In  Col.  3,  21,  fathers  are  cautioned 
not  to  provoke  their  children.  Here  the  meaning  is  that  the 
zeal  of  the  Corinthians  had  excited  the  zeal  of  others.  Very 
many,  toOs  TrAetoi/as,  the  majority,  the  greater  number.  Acts 
19,  32.  It  was  not  every  individual  of  the  Macedonian  Chris- 
tians, but  the  majority  of  them,  whom  the  zeal  of  the  Corin- 
thians had  excited. 


3.  Yet  have  I  sent  tlie  brethren,  lest  our  boasting 
of  you  should  be  in  vain  in  this  behalf ;  that,  as  I  said, 
ye  may  be  ready. 

If  the  connection  is  with  v.  1,  the  Se  here  answers  to  the 
fxev  there.  '  There  is  no  need  to  write,  hut  I  send,  &c.'  The 
reference,  however,  may  be  to  v.  2.  'I  boasted  of  your  prep- 
aration, hut  lest  my  boasting  be  falsified,  I  send,  &c.'  The 
hrethren,  viz.,  Titus  and  his  two  companions,  who  were  about 
to  proceed  to  Corinth  to  attend  to  this  matter.  Lest  our 
boasting  of  you  he  in  vain,  Kcvai^fj,  be  proved  unfounded, 
1  Cor.  9,  15,  i.  e.  shown  to  be  an  empty  boast.  In  this  hehalf. 
Paul  did  not  fear  that  the  good  account  which  he  had  given 
of  the  Corinthians  in  other  matters  should  be  contradicted  by 
the  facts,  but  only  in  this  one  afiair  of  the  collection  for  the 
poor.  That,  as  I  said,  ye  may  he  ready.  This  clause  is  par- 
allel with  the  preceding.  '  I  sent  the  brethren  that  my  boast, 
iug  be  not  found  vain,  i.  e.  I  sent  them  that  ye  may  be  ready.' 
10 


216  II.    CORIXTIIIANS    9,4. 

It  uppoars  from  8,  10  that  the  Corinthians  had  avowed  the 
purpose  to  make  a  collection  for  the  poor  at  Jerusalem,  and 
had  actually  begun  the  work  a  year  ago.  Paul  had  mentioned 
this  fact  to  the  Macedonians,  telling  them  that  the  Corinthi- 
ans were  ready  to  do  their  part  in  this  business.  He  now 
sends  Titus  and  the  brethren  that  the  work  may  at  once  be 
completed,  and  his  boasting  of  them  prove  to  be  true.  It  is 
plain  that  he  could  not  have  told  the  Macedonians  that  the 
collection  at  Corinth  had  already  been  made,  because  he  not 
only  knew  that  such  was  not  the  fact,  but  he  in  this  very  pas- 
sage refers  to  the  work  as  yet  to  be  accomplished.  He  could 
hardly  say,  '  I  told  the  Macedonians  you  had  made  your  col- 
lection a  year  ago  and  had  the  money  all  ready  to  hand  over,' 
at  the  very  moment  he  was  urging  them  to  collect  it.  The 
simple  fact  is  that  he  had  said  the  Corinthians  were  ready  to 
do  their  part  in  this  business,  and  he  begged  them  to  do  at 
once  what  they  intended  to  do,  lest  his  boasting  of  their 
readiness  {irpo^vfxia)  should  prove  to  have  been  unfounded. 
There  is  nothing  in  this  inconsistent  with  perfect  truthfulness 
and  open-hearted  fairness. 

4.  Lest  haply  if  they  of  Macedonia  come  with  me, 
and  find  you  unprepared,  we  (that  we  say  not,  ye) 
should  be  ashamed  in  this  same  confident  boasting. 

Paul  was  attended  from  city  to  city  by  travelhng  com- 
panions, who  conducted  him  on  his  way  and  ministered  to 
him.  iCor.  16,  6.  Rom.  15,  24.  Acts  17,  14.  15.  &c.  Ashe 
was  now  in  Macedonia  it  was  in  accordance  with  the  usual 
custom  that  Macedonians  should  attend  him  to  Corinth. 
If  they  come  with  me,  tav  IX^wo-iv,  shall  have  come^  i.  e.  'Lest 
when  they  come  and  find  you  miprepared^  i.  e.  unprepared  to 
do  what  a  year  ago  you  professed  your  readiness  to  do,  we 
(that  we  say  not^  you)  should  he  ashamed.  The  failure  would 
indeed  be  a  cause  of  shame  to  the  Corinthians,  but  he  delicate- 
ly substitutes  himself.  He  appeals  to  their  better  feelings 
when  he  calls  upon  them  to  save  him  from  mortification,  in- 
stead of  exhorting  them  to  save  themselves  from  disgrace. 
In  this  satne  confident  boasting.  The  words  rrj<i  Kavx^yo-cws  are 
omitted  by  almost  all  the  recent  editors  from  Griesbach  down. 
They  are  not  found  in  the  MSS.  B,  C,  D,  F,  G,  or  the  ancient 
versions.    They  probably  were  added  by  a  transcriber  from 


II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  5.  211 

11,1V.  These  words  being  omitted,  the  text  stands,  iv  rrj  v-n-oa-- 
rao-et  rav'-n^,  in  this  confidence^  i.  e.  ashamed  in  relation  to  this 
confidence.  Comr).  Heb.  3,  14.  11,  1.  Others  take  the  word 
in  the  sense  of  negotium^  "  in  this  thing,"  which  is  not  only 
unnecessary,  but  contrary  to  usage. 

5.  Therefore  I  thought  it  necessary  to  exhort  the 
brethren,  that  they  would  go  before  unto  you,  and 
make  up  beforehand  your  bounty,  whereof  ye  had  no- 
tice before,  that  the  same  might  be  ready,  as  (a  matter 
of)  bounty,  and  not  as  (of)  covetousness. 

Therefore^  i.  e.  in  order  to  avoid  the  mortification  of  his 
boasting  being  proved  vain.  I  thought  it  necessary  to  exhort 
the  brethren^  (Titus  and  his  companions,)  that  they  would  go 
before  /  {TrapaKokia-at — tva,  as  in  8,  6,  and  often  elsewhere,  iVa 
is  used  after  verbs  signifying  to  ask,  exhort,  <fec.,  in  the  sense 
of  on.)  Would  go  before.)  i.  e.  before  Paul  and  his  Macedoni- 
an companions.  And  make  up  beforehand.,  TrpoKaTapTtawo-L,  a 
word  not  found  in  the  Greek  writers,  and  occurring  in  the 
New  Testament  only  in  this  passage.  The  simple  verb  means, 
to  put  fully  in  order,  to  complete.  This  the  brethren  were  to 
do  in  reference  to  the  collection,  before  Paul's  arrival.  Your 
bounty,  rrjv  evXoytav  vpMv.,  your  blessing.  The  word  is  used 
m  the  sense  both  of  benediction  and  benefaction.  The  latter 
is  clearly  its  meaning  here,  as  perhaps  also  in  Rom.  15,  29; 
see  also  Eph.  1,  3,  and  in  the  LXX.  Gen.  33,  11.  Judges  1,  15. 
1  Sam.  25,  27,  &c.  So  in  English,  a  blessing  is  either  a  prayer 
for  good,  or  the  good  itself  Whereof  ye  had  notice  before. 
Here  the  reading  is  doubtful.  The  common  text  has  npoKU' 
TrjyyeXfxivTjv,  announced  beforehand.  Not,  however,  as  our 
translation  has  it,  announced  to  you.,  but  to  others.  The 
benefaction  before  spoken  of,  i.  e.  of  which  so  much  has  been 
said.  Almost  all  the  critical  editions  read  TrpoeTrrjyyeXjxevrjv^ 
^yromised  beforehand.,  '  your  promised  benefaction.'  And  this 
gives  a  better  sense,  as  the  apostle  was  urging  them  to  do 
what  they  had  promised.  That  the  same  might  be  ready  as  a 
matter  of  bounty  j  o{;rcos  w?  cvXoyiav.,  so  as  a  blessing.,  i.  e.  as 
something  worthy  of  the  name.  This  may  mean,  '  worthy  of 
the  name  because  the  fruit  of  love  ; '  or,  because  given  freely ; 
or,  because  rich,  abundant.  This  last  is  to  be  preferred  be- 
cause of  the  antithesis  between  evXoyta  and  xXcoj/c^ta,  because 


2x8  II.   CORIl!^THIANS   9,  6. 

of  the  explanation  in  v.  6,  and  because  cheerfulness  in  giving 
is  afterwards  enforced.  And  not  as  of  covetousness  ;  literally, 
not  as  covetousness,  i.  e.  not  such  a  gift  as  betrays  the  avarice 
of  the  giver. 

6.  But  this  (I  say),  He  which  soweth  sparingly, 
shall  reap  also  sparingly ;  and  he  which  soweth  bounti- 
fully, shall  reap  also  bountifully. 

The  words  tovto  Se,  but  this^  are  commonly  and  most  natu- 
rally explained  by  supplying  some  such  words  as  I  say^  or, 
consider.  Others  take  them  as  the  accusative  absolute ;  '  as 
to  this,  however.'  Meyer  unnaturally  makes  rovro  the  object 
of  cTTret/atoj/,  '  He  wlio  SOWS  this  sparingly,  &c.'  That  is,  in  oth- 
er cases  it  may  be  different,  but  in  this  spiritual  sowing,  in 
this  seed  of  good  deeds,  the  rule  always  holds  good.  Our 
version  gives  a  simple  and  suitable  sense.  The  only  question 
of  doubt  in  the  verse  is  the  meaning  of  the  words  ctt'  euAoytatg, 
which  our  translators  have  rendered  adverbially,  hountifidly . 
'He  that  sows  bountifully,  shall  reap  also  bountifully.'  This 
undoubtedly  is  the  meaning  as  determined  by  the  antithesis, 
'Pie  that  sows  c^etSo/xeW?  sparingly^  and  he  that  sows  Itt  €vXo^ 
yiats  bountifully?  But  the  question  is  how  to  get  that  sense 
out  of  the  words,  which  literally  mean  icith  blessings.  *■  He 
that  sows  loith  blessings^  shall  reap  icith  bless iiigs?  The  force 
y  of  the  preposition  ctti  with  the  dative  in  this  place  may  be  ex- 
plained after  the  analogy  of  such  passages  as  Rom.  4,  18. 
1  Cor.  9,  10;  lir  iXiriSi^  with  hope,  as  expressing  the  condition 
under  which  any  thing  is  done ;  or  after  the  analogy  of  such 
places  as  Rom.  5,  14,  iirl  tw  ofxoLojfxaTt,  after  the  similitude.,  as 
expressing  the  rule  according  to  which  it  is  done.  In  either 
case  the  preposition  and  noun  may  express  an  adverbial  quali- 
fication. In  this  case  therefore,  eV  cuXoy tat?,  ad  normam  bene- 
Jiciorum^  as  Wahl  translates  it,  may,  as  the  context  requires, 
mean  kindly,  freely,  or  bountifully.  Here,  as  just  stated,  the 
antithesis  with  c^etSo/xcVcoq  requires  the  last,  viz.,  bountifully: 
The  sentiment  here  expressed  is  the  same  as  in  Prov.  11,  24, 
"  There  is  that  scattereth  and  yet  increaseth  ;  and  there  is  that 
witliholdeth  more  than  is  meet,  but  it  tendeth  to  poverty." 
It  is  comprehended  also  in  the  wider  truth  taught  in  Gal.  6,  V. 
Our  Lord  teaches  the  same  doctrine,  Luke  6,  38,  "  Give  and  it 
shall  be  given  unto  you,  &c."     Matt.  10,41,  and  often  else- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  1.  219 

"where.  It  is  edifying  to  notice  the  difference  between  the 
divine  wisdom  and  the  wisdom  of  men.  As  the  proper  motive 
to  acts  of  benevolence  is  a  desire  for  the  happiness  of  others 
and  a  regard  to  the  will  of  God,  human  wisdom  savs  it  is 
wrong  to  appeal  to  any  selfish  motive.  The  wisdom  of  God, 
while  teaching  the  entire  abnegation  of  self,  and  requiring  a 
man  even  to  hate  his  own  life  when  in  conflict  with  the  glory 
of  God,  tells  all  who  thus  deny  themselves  that  they  thereby 
most  effectually  promote  their  own  interests.  He  that  loses 
his  life  shall  save  it.  He  that  does  not  seek  his  own,  shall  best 
secure  his  own.  He  that  humbleth  himself  shall  be  exalted. 
There  can,  however,  be  no  hypocrisy  in  this  matter.  It  is  not 
the  man  who  pretends  to  deny  himself,  to  humble  himself,  or 
to  seek  the  good  of  others  rather  than  his  own,  while  he  acts 
from  a  regard  to  self,  who  is  to  be  thus  rewarded.  It  is  only 
those  w4io  sincerely  postpone  themselves  to  others,  w^ho  shall 
be  preferred  before  them.  We  may  thence  learn  that  it  is 
right  to  present  to  men  the  divinely  ordained  consequences  of 
their  actions  as  motives  to  control  their  conduct.  It  is  right 
to  tell  men  that  obedience  to  God,  devotion  to  his  glory  and 
the  good  of  others,  will  effectually  promote  their  own  welfare. 

7.  Every  man  according  as  lie  purposetli  in  his 
heart,  (so  let  him  give  ;)  not  grudgingly,  or  of  necessi- 
ty :  for  God  loveth  a  cheerful  giver. 

Though  he  wished  them  to  give  bountifully,  he  desired 

them  to  do  it  freely.     Let  each  one  give  as  he  jnirj^oses  m  his 

heart,  i.  e.  as  he  cordially,  or  with  the  consent  of  the  heart, 

r    determines.     This  stands  opposed  to  w^hat  follows,  and,  there- 

l   fore,  is  explained  by  it.     JS^ot  grudgingly,  U  Xv-n-qs,  not  out  of 

\   sorrow ;  i.  e.  let  not  the  gift  proceed  out  of  a  reluctant  state 

\  of  mind,  grieving  after  what  is  given  as  so  much  lost.      Or  of 

\  yiecessity,  i.  e.  constrained  by  circumstances  to  give,  wdien  you 

\ prefer  not  to  do  it.     Many  gifts  are  thus  given  sorrowfully, 

\Avhere  the  giver  is  induced  to  give  by  a  regard  to  public 

lopinion,  or  by  stress  of  conscience.     This  reluctance  spoils  the 

gilt.     It  loses  all  its  fragrance  when  the  incense  of  a  free  and 

Joyful  spirit  is  w^anting.     For  God  loveth  a  cheerful  giver; 

Vkapov  SoTTjv,  a  joyful  giver,  one  to  whom  givmg  is^  a  delight^ 

w\ho  does  it  with  hilarity.     The  passage  is  quoted  from  Prov. 

2i,  9,  where   the  H^rew  means,    "A  good   eye   shall  be 


220  II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  8. 

blessed."  The  LXX.  renders  the  words  quoad  sensnm^  avSpa 
IXapov  Kol  Borrjv  euXoyei  6  .9eos ;  a  version  wliich  Panl  adopts  for 
substance.  God  blesses,  loves,  delights  in,  the  joyous  giver. 
Let  not,  therefore,  those  who  give  reluctantly,  or  from  stress 
of  circumstances,  or  to  secure  merit,  imagine  that  mere  giving 
is  acceptable  to  God.  Unless  we  feel  it  is  an  honour  and  a 
joy  to  give,  God  does  not  accept  the  offering. 

8.  And  God  (is)  able  to  make  all  grace  abound 
toward  you ;  that  ye,  always  having  all  sufficiency  in 
all  (things),  may  abound  to  every  good  work. 

From  this  verse  to  the  11th,  the  apostle  assures  them  that 
the  liberal  and  cheerful  giver  will  always  have  something  to 
give.  God  is  able.  The  sacred  writers  often  appeal  to  the 
power  of  God  as  a  ground  of  confidence  to  his  people.  Rom. 
IC,  25.  Eph.  3,  20.  Jude  24.  This  is  done  especially  when 
we  are  called  upon  to  believe  something  which  is  contrary  to 
the  natural  course  of  things.  Giving  is,  to  the  natural  eye, 
the  way  to  lessen  our  store,  not  to  increase  it.  The  Bible 
says  it  is  the  way  to  increase  it.  To  believe  this  it  is  only 
necessary  to  believe  in  the  power,  providence,  and  promise 
of  God.  God  is  able  to  make  tlie  paradox,  '*  he  that  scatter- 
eth,  increaseth,"  prove  true.  God  is  able  to  make  all  grace 
ahound ;  x^-ptv^  favour,  gift,  whether  temporal  or  spiritual,  or 
both,  depends  on  the  context.  Here  the  reference  is  clearly 
to  earthly  good ;  that  kind  of  good  or  favour  is  intended 
which  enables  those  who  receive  it  to  give  abundantly.  The 
idea,  therefore,  obviously  is,  '  God  is  able  to  increase  your 
wealth.'  That  ?/e,  liamng  all  sufficiency  in  all  things.  The 
expression  here  is  striking,  tV  Travri  TroLVTore  Tracrai ,  i?i  all  things, 
always,  all.  God  is  able  so  to  enrich  you  that  you  shall  have 
in  every  respect,  at  all  times,  all  kinds  of  sufficiency.  The 
word  is  amdpK^iav,  Avhich  everywhere  else  means  contentment. 
This  sense  Giotius,  Meyer  and  others  retain  here.  'That  hav- 
ing full  cont(!ntment,'  i.  e.  being  fully  satisfied  and  not  craving 
more,  you  may,  &c.  This,  however,  is  not  so  well  suited  to 
the  context,  and  especially  to  the  qualifying  words,  ev  TravTi. 
It  is  'a  competency  in  every  thing'  of  wliich  the  apostle 
speaks.  T/iat  ye  may  abound,  7r€pL(T(TtvqT€,  jnay  have  abund- 
ance. Phil.  4,  18.  The  word  is  used  transitively  in  the  first 
clause  of  the  verse  and  intransitively  in  the  last.     '  God  is  able 


II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  9.  221 

to  cause  your  riches  to  abound,  that  ye  may  have  abundance 
to  every  good  icorh  ;''  cts  itav  epyov  dya^ov,  in  reference  to,  sc 
as  to  be  able  to  perform  every  good  work.  The  logical  con- 
nection is  not  with  the  intermediate  participial  clause,  '  that 
having  sufficiency,  ye  may  have  abundance,'  but  with  the  first 
clause,  '  God  is  able  to  cause  your  resources  to  abound,  that 
ye  may  have  abundance.'  The  participial  clause  expresses 
simply  what,  notwithstanding  their  liberality,  would  be  the 
result.  Having  (i.  e.  still  having)  a  competency  for  yourselves, 
ye  will  have  abundance  for  every  good  work.  There  is  an- 
other interpretation  of  this  passage  which  the  EngUsh  version 
naturally  suggests.  'That  ye  may  abound  in  every  good 
work.'  But  this  the  Greek  T\ill  not  admit ;  because  it  is  eis 
TTOLv,  K.T.k.,  and  not  iv  Travrt,  K.T.X.  See  1  Cor.  15,  58.  Besides, 
the  other  interpretation  is  better  suited  to  the  context. 

9.  As  it  is  written,  He  hath  dispersed  abroad ;  he 
hath  given  to  the  poor:  his  righteousness  remaineth 
forever. 

The  connection  is  with  the  last  clause  of  the  preceding 
verse.  Paul  had  said  that  he  who  gives  shall  have  abundance 
to  give.  This  is  precisely  what  is  said  in  Psalm  112.  Of  the 
man  who  fears  God  it  is  there  said,  "  Wealth  and  riches  shall 
be  in  his  house."  "  He  showeth  favour,  and  lendeth."  "  He 
hath  dispersed,  he  hath  given  to  the  poor ;  his  righteousness 
endureth  forever."  The  main  idea  the  apostle  designs  to  pre- 
sent as  having  the  sanction  of  the  word  of  God  is,  that  he  who 
is  liberal,  who  disperses,  scatters  abroad  his  gifts  Avith  free- 
handed generosity,  as  a  man  scatters  seed,  shall  always  have 
abundance.  And  this  the  Psalmist  expressly  asserts.  It  may 
be  said  that  this  is  not  in  accordance  with  experience.  We 
do  not  always  see  Hberality  attended  by  riches.  This  is  a 
difficulty  not  peculiar  to  this  case.  The  Bible  is  full  of  decla- 
rations concerning  the  blessedness  of  the  righteous,  and  of  the 
providential  favours  which  attend  their  lot.  This  Psalm  says, 
"  Wealth  and  riches,"  or,  as  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  have  it, 
"  Glory  and  riches  shall  be  in  their  house ; "  and  our  Lord 
says,  that  those  who  forsake  all  for  him  shall  in  this  life  re- 
ceive an  hundred-fold,  houses,  lands,  &c.  Mark  10,  30.  These 
passages  were  not  designed  to  be  taken  litei'ally  or  applied 
universally.  They  teach  three  things.  1st.  The  tendency  of 
things.     It  is  the  tendency  of  righteousness  to  produce  bless- 


222'  II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  10. 

eclness,  as  it  is  the  tendency  of  evil  to  produce  misery.  2d. 
The  general  course  of  divine  providence.  God  in  his  pro^n 
denee  does  as  a  general  rule  j'rosper  the  diligent  and  bless 
the  righteous.  Honesty  is  the  best  policy,  is  a  maxim  even 
of  worldly  wisdom.  3d.  Even  in  this  life  righteousness  pro- 
duces a  hundred-fold  more  good  than  imrighteousness  does. 
A  righteous  man  is  a  hundred-fold  moi-e  happy  than  a  wicked 
man,  other  things  being  equal.  A  good  man  is  a  hundred-fold 
more  happy  in  sickness,  in  poverty,  in  bereavement,  than  a 
wicked  man  in  the  same  circumstances.  It  is,  therefore,  ac- 
cording to  Scripture,  a  general  law,  that  he  that  scattereth, 
increaseth ;  he  that  gives  shall  have  wherewith  to  give. 

His  righteousness  (i.  e.  the  righteousness  of  the  man  who 
gives  to  the  poor)  endureth  forever.  The  word  St/catoo-wry, 
righteousness^  in  Scripture,  is  often  used  in  a  comprehensive 
sense,  including  all^noral  excellence ;  and  often  in  a  restricted 
sense  for  rectitude  or  justice.  When  used  in  the  comprehen- 
sive sense,  it  depends  on  the  context  what  particular  form  of 
goodness  is  intended.  To  return  a  jDoor  man's  pledge  is  an 
act  of  StKatoo-wT^,  Deut.  24,  13;  so  is  giving  alms.  Matt.  6,  1 
(where  the  true  reading  is  StKatoo-wiyi^,  and  not  eXcrjixoa-vvrjv), 
In  like  manner  the  "glory  of  God  "  may  mean  the  sum  of  his 
divine  perfections,  or  his  wisdom,  power,  or  mercy,  as  special 
forms  of  his  glory,  as  the  context  requires.  In  this  passage  it 
is  plain  that  righteousness  means  general  excellence  or  virtue, 
as  manifested  in  beneficence.  And  when  it  is  said  that  his 
beneficence  shall  continue  forever,  the  implication  is  that  he 
shall  always  have  wherewith  to  be  beneficent.  And  this  is 
here  the  main  idea.  He  shall  always  be  prosperous ;  or,  as  it 
is  expressed  at  the  close  of  v.  8,  he  shall  have  abundance  for 
every  good  work,  forever  is  equivalent  to  always^  as  cis  rov 
atwva  is  often  used  for  indefinite  duration.  Whether  the 
duration  be  absolutely  without  limit,  or  whether  the  limit  be 
unknown  or  undetermined,  depends  in  each  case  on  the  nature 
of  the  thing  spoken  of,  and  on  the  analogy  of  Scripture. 

10.  Now,  he  that  ministereth  seed  to  the  sower, 
both  minister  bread  for  (your)  food,  and  multiply  your 
seed  sown,  and  increase  the  fruits  of  your  righteous- 
ness. 

Now  ;  hi  IS  continuative.     God  is  able  to  give  ^ou  abund 


II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  10.  223 

ance,  and  he  will  do  it.  This  verse  is  a  declaration,  and  not  a 
wish.  Our  translation,  which  makes  it  a  prayer,  is  founded 
on  the  Elzevir,  or  common  text,  which  reads  x^P'TPl^^h  ttAt/^-J- 
vai,  av^rjG-ai  in  the  optative,  instead  of  the  futures  x^Piyw^'-* 
7r\7j&vve'i,  av^aa,  which  are  supported  by  a  great  preponder- 
ance of  authorities,  and  are  adopted  by  Griesbach,  Lachmann, 
Tischendorf,  and  by  the  great  majority  of  editors.  The  sense 
expressed  by  the  future  forms  is  also  better  suited  to  the  con- 
text. Paul's  desire  was  to  produce  the  conviction  in  the 
minds  of  the  Corinthians,  which  he  himself  so  strongly  felt, 
that  no  man  is  the  poorer  for  being  liberal.  The  ground  of 
this  conviction  was  twofold ;  the  explicit  promise  of  God,  and 
his  character  and  oreneral  mode  of  dealing^  with  men.  Jle  that 
ministereth  seed  to  the  sower  ;  6  iTnxoprjyujv,  he  whose  preroga- 
tive and  wont  it  is  to  supply  seed  to  the  sower.  Such  being 
the  character  and,  so  to  speak,  the  office  of  God,  Paul  was 
sure  he  would  supply  the  necessities  of  his  giving  people. 
The  words  koI  aprov  els  ^pui(Tiv  our  translators,  after  Calvin  and 
others,  connect  with  the  following  clause,  and  render  /cai  both. 
"  Shall  both  minister  bread  for  food,  and  multiply,  &c."  The 
obviously  natural  construction  is  with  tlie  preceding  clause, 
*  He  that  ministereth  seed  to  the  sower,  and  bread  for  eating.' 
(The  word  is  ^pojo-ts,  eating^  and  not  (3pu)ixa,food.)  This  connec- 
tion is  also  in  accordance  with  the  passage  in  Is.  55,  10,  which 
was  evidently  in  the  apostle's  mind,  and  where  the  words  are, 
"  Seed  to  the  sower,  and  bread  to  the  eater,"  This  bountiful 
God  ivil'l  give  and  increase  your  seed.  Your  seed  means  your 
resources,  your  wealth,  that  which  you  can  scatter  abroad  in 
acts  of  beneficence,  as  a  sower  scatters  seed.  He  who  fur- 
Aishes  the  husbandman  seed  for  his  harvest,  wiU  abundantly 
Mupply  you  with  seed  for  your  harvest.  And  increase  the 
Ifruits  of  your  righteousness.  This  is  parallel  with  the  pre- 
|ceding  clause,  and  means  the  same  thing.  '  The  fruits  of  your 
I  righteousness,'  are  not  the  rewards  of  your  righteousness, 
I  either  here  or  hereafter.  But  'your  works  of  righteousness,' 
*^i.  e.  of  beneficence ;  the  word  StKatoo-w-^  having  the  same  sense 
here  as  in  the  preceding  clause.  As  in  v.  9,  the  words  "  his 
righteousness  remaineth  forever"  mean  that  the  righteous 
shall  always  have  the  means  of  being  beneficent ;  so  here  to 
increase  "  the  fruits  of  your  righteousness,"  means,  '  will  in- 
crease your  means  of  doing  good.'  This  sense  the  context 
demands,  and  the  words,  in  their  scriptural  sense,  readily  ad- 
mil.  The  other  interpretation,  however,  according  to  which 
10* 


224  II.   CORINTHIANS   9,  11.  12. 

*'  the  fruits  of  your  righteousness  "  mean  the  reward  of  your 
righteousness,  amounts  substantially  to  the  same  thing ;  for 
the  reward  of  beneficence  is,  according  to  the  context,  the  in 
crease  of  the  means  wherewith  to  be  beneficent. 

11.  Being  enriched  in  every  thing  to  all  bountiful- 
ness,  which  causeth  through  ns  thanksgiving  to  God. 

In  our  version  vs.  9  and  10  are  regarded  as  a  parenthesis, 
and  this  verse  is  connected  with  v.  8.  "That  ye  may  have 
abundance  for  every  good  work — ^being  enriched,  &c."  But 
this  is  unnecessary  and  forbidden  by  the  regular  connection 
of  vs.  9  and  10  with  v.  8.  Others  supply  the  substantive  verb 
"  ye  shall  be  enriched."  Almost  all  the  modern  commenta- 
tors assume  the  irregular  construction  of  the  participle  of 
which  so  many  examples  occur  both  in  the  New  Testament 
and  in  the  classics.  See  Eph.  4,  2.  3,  17.  Col.  2,  2.  3,  16. 
Acts  15,  22,  &c.  The  connection  is  therefore  with  what  im- 
mediately precedes.  'God  will  increase  the  fruits  of  your 
righteousness,  (i.  e.  your  resources,)  being  enriched,  i.  e.  so 
that  you  shall  be  enriched,  <fec.'  The  reference  is  not  to  in- 
ward or  spiritual  riches,  but,  as  the  whole  context  demands, 
to  worldly  riches.  'If  you  are  liberal,  God  will  give  you 
abundance,  so  that  you  shall  be  rich  to  all  bountifulness^  cts 
Traaav  airXoT-qTa.  The  preposition  (cts)  expresses  the  design  or 
end  for  which  they  shall  be  enriched.  JSoimtifulness  or  liber- 
ality ;  the  word  is  dTT/Wi;?,  which  means  sincerity,  rightmind- 
edness.  Another  example  of  a  general  term  used  in  a  specific 
sense.  See  8,  2.  Rom.  15,  12.  Which  causes  through  us,  i.  e. 
by  our  ministry.  Paul  had  been  instrumental  in  exciting  the 
liberality  of  the  Corinthians  and  in  effecting  the  contribution 
for  the  poor  in  Jerusalem,  and  therefore  he  could  say  that  the 
thanksgivmg  to  God  which  was  thus  called  forth  was  through 
him.  The  good  effect  of  the  liberality  of  Christians  was  not 
limited  to  the  relief  of  the  temporal  necessities  of  their  breth- 
ren ;  it  had  the  higher  effect  of  promoting  gratitude  to  God. 
On  this  idea  the  apostle  enlarges  in  the  following  verses. 

12.  For  the  administration  of  this  service  not  only 
supplieth  the  want  of  the  saints,  but  is  abundant  also 
by  many  thanksgivings  unto  God. 

Your  liberality  produces  gratitude,  for  (ort),  because,  ih^ 


II.    CORINTHIANS    9,  13.  225 

administration  of  this  service^  rj  SiaKovta  t-^s  A-ciroipyias  TavTr]<;. 
This  uiay  mean,  '  The  administration  by  me  of  this  service  of 
yours,  i.  e.  this  benefaction  of  yom-s,  which  is  a  service  ren- 
dered to  God  and  his  people.'  It  is  a  X^irovpyia ;  properly  a 
public  service,  but  always  in  the  New  Testament  (except  per- 
haps Phil.  2,  30)  a  religious  service  such  as  was  rendered  by 
the  priests  in  the  temple,  Luke  1,  23.  Heb.  8,  6.  9,  21 ;  or  by 
the  Christian  ministry,  Phil.  2,  17.  Comp.  Rom.  1,  9.  Or,  it 
may  mean,  '  The  service  which  you  render  by  this  benefaction.' 
The  StttKona,  ministry,  or  service,  consisted  in  the  Xctrovpyta, 
the  contribution.  This  suits  better  with  v.  13,  where  StaKovta 
is  used  for  what  the  Corinthians  did,  not  for  what  Paul  did. 
\I>rot  only  supplieth.  The  Greek  is  somewhat  peculiar;  co-rt 
'fTrpoaavaTrXrjpovcra,  it  is  not  only  fully  compensatory  .  .  .  but  it  is 
I  (Trepto-o-evovcra)  overflowing  ^  the  participles  being  used  as  ad- 
f  jectives  expressing  the  quality  of  the  thing  spoken  of.  The 
\  want  of  the  saints.  Their  necessities  are  not  only  supplied, 
'  but  your  service  overflows,  or  is  abundantly  productive  of 
good;  by  means  of  many  thanksgimngs  to  God ;  tw  ^ew  de- 
pending on  ev;!(apto-Tta)v  as  in  verse  11. 

13.  While  by  the  experiment  of  this  ministration 
they  glorify  God  for  your  professed  subjection  unto  the 
gospel  of  Christ,  and  for  (your)  liberal  distribution  unto 
them,  and  unto  all  (men). 

There  is  the  same  irregularity  of  grammatical  construction 
in  this  verse  as  in  v.  11 ;  the  participle  So^a^ovre?  here  referring 
to  TToXXojv,  as  there  TrXovrt^o/xei/ot  to  vfxCjv.  The  sense  is,  'Many 
thank  God,  glorifying  him  (Sia  tt}?  8o/<t/>t.^s  t^5  8taKovta<j  ravryjs) 
on  the  occasion  of  the  evidence  offered  by  this  service,'  The 
preposition  Sid  here  expresses  the  occasional,  not  the  instru- 
mental, or  rational  cause.  It  is  neither  through,  nor,  o?i  ac- 
count of  but  simply  by,  i.  e.  occasioned  by.  The  simplest 
explanation  of  SoKifxi^,  in  this  passage,  is  proof,  or  evidence ; 
and  the  genitive,  StaKovia?,  is  the  genitive  of  apposition.  The 
service  was  the  proof.  The  thing  proved  by  the  service  ren- 
dered by  the  Corinthians  to  their  poor  brethren,  is  what  is 
mentioned  in  the  sequel,  viz.,  their  obedience  and  their  fellow- 
ship with  the  saints.  Meyer  makes  Soki/xt;  mean  indoles  spec* 
tata,  the  nature,  or  internal  character.  "  From  the  nature  of 
this  sei  vice,"  whereby  it  proved  itself  to  be  genuine,  or  what 


226  II.   CORINTHIANS  9,  IG. 

the  Christian  spirit  demanded.  Calvin's  explanaticn  is,  Speci- 
men idoneum  probandse  Corinthiorum  caritati,  quod  erga  fra- 
tres  procul  reniotos  tarn  liberales  erant ;  which  amounts  very 
much  to  what  is  iraphed  in  the  lirst  interpretation  mentioned. 
They  glorify  G-od  for  your  professed  subjection.  The  words 
are,  IttX  rfj  vTrorayrj  rrj<;  6/x-oAoyias  vfjiwv ;  on  account  of  obedience 
to  your  confession.  '0/xoA.oyia  is  always  in  the  New  Testament 
used  for  the  profession,  or  confession,  of  Christianity.  1  Tim. 
6,  12.  Heb.  3,  1.  4,  14.  10,  23.  Beza,  whom  our  translators 
follow,  gives  the  genitive  the  force  of  the  participle,  jyrofessed 
obedience^  i.  e.  obedience  which  you  profess.  Others  make  it 
the  genitive  of  the  source,  "  the  obedience  which  flows  from 
your  confession ; "  others  again  make  it  the  genitive  of  the 
object,  "obedience  to  your  confession."  This  gives  the  best 
sense,  and  agrees  best  with  the  analogous  expression,  "  obedi- 
ence of  Christ,"  10,  5.  To  the  gospel  of  Christy  cts  cmy. 
These  words,  it  is  said,  cannot  properly  be  constructed  either 
with  vTTOTayfj  or  with  6/xoA.oyta5,  because  neither  vTrorda-a-o)  nor 
o/xoXoyeo)  is  followed  by  ets.  On  this  account  Meyer  connects 
the  clause  in  question  with  So^a^ovres,  '  they  praise  God — in 
reference  to  the  gospel.'  But  this  is  forced,  and  does  not 
agree  with  the  following  clause ;  as  there,  eU  Trai/ras,  if  con- 
nected with  8o|a^oi/T€s,  gives  no  definite  sense.  De  Wette 
connects  ct?  emy.  with  what  precedes,  '  Your  confession — as  it 
concerns  the  gospel.'  And  for  your  liberal  distribution  unto 
the77i,  and  unto  all.  This  is  the  second  ground  of  praise  to 
God.  The  words  are  dTrAdrT^ri  r^s  Kotvcovta?,  the.  sincerity  of 
your  felloic ship.  These  general  terms  may,  if  the  context  re- 
quired, be  taken  in  the  specific  sense,  "  liberality  of  your  con- 
tribution," as  is  done  by  our  translators ;  or  they  may  be 
understood  in  their  wider  and  more  natural  sense.  The 
ground  on  which  the  saints  at  Jerusalem  would  praise  God 
was  the  manifestation  of  the  Christian  fellowship  which  the 
Corinthians  cherished  not  only  for  them,  but  for  all  believers. 
It  was  the  consciousness  of  the  communion  of  saints — the  as- 
surance that  believers,  however  separated,  or  however  distin- 
guished as  Jews  and  Gentiles,  bond  or  free,  are  one  body  in 
Chi-ist,  that  called  forth  their  praise  to  God.  And,  tlierefore, 
the  apostle  says  it  was  the  {kolvmvio)  fellowsliip  of  the  Corinthi- 
ans not  only  towards  them,  (tlie  saints  in  Jerusalem,)  but 
towards  all  believers,  that  was  the  ground  of  their  praise 
See  Phil.  1,  5,  for  an  example  of  KOLvoivia  followed  by  £t5,  as  it 
is  in  this  verse. 


II.   CORINTHIANS    9,  14.15.  227 

14.  And  by  their  prayer  for  yoii,  which  long  after 
you,  for  the  exceeding  grace  of  God  in  you. 

This  rerse  admits  of  a  threefold  construction.  It  may  be 
connected  with  v.  12,  Ser/o-et  being  parallel  with  Sta  ttoWuv  evx. 
'  Your  liberality  is  abundant,  or  overiiowing,  [irepLa-a^vovo-a^) 
through  many  thanksgivings — and  by  their  prayer  for  you.' 
That  is,  our  liberality  is  productive  of  abundant  good,  not 
only  by  calling  forth  thanksgiving  to  God,  but  also  by  leading 
the  objects  of  your  kindness  to  pray  for  you.  This  is  a  full 
compensation.  The  prayers  and  blessings  of  the  poor  are 
their  benefactions  to  the  rich,  descending  on  them  as  the  dew 
on  Hermon.  Or  the  connection  may  be  with  So^a^ovre?  in  v. 
13.  'They  glorify  God  for  your  obedience,  .  .  .  and  by  their 
prayer.'  But  in  this  case,  the  natural  meaning  would  be, 
{Se-qcret  being  co-ordinate  with  v-rroTayfj),  'They  glorify  God  for 
your  subjection — and  for  their  prayer.'  This  does  not  give  a 
good  sense.  Believers  do  not  glorify  God  /or  their  prayers. 
Others,  as  Meyer,  take  avrCjv  eTrtTro^owrcov  together  as  the 
genitive  absolute,  and  Kai',  not  as  cmd,  but  also.  '  You  (Co- 
rinthians) manifest  your  fellowship  for  them — they  also  with 
prayer  for  you  earnestly  longing  for  you.'  This  gives  a  perti- 
nent sense.  The  first  mentioned  explanation  is,  however, 
generally  preferred.  I^or  the  exceecU?ig  grace  of  God  in  you. 
That  is,  071  account  of  (Sea  ti]v  x^ptv,)  the  surpassing  grace,  or 
favour  of  God  manifested  towards  or  upon  you  (e(^'  v^lv)  ;  in 
that  he  had  rendered  them  so  liberal,  and  so  filled  them  with 
a  Christian  spirit. 

15.  Thanks   (be)   unto    God  for  his   unspeakable 

gift. 

According  to  Calvin,  and  perhaps  the  majority  of  com- 
mentators, the  gift  to  which  Paul  refers,  is  that  spoken  of  in 
the  context,  viz.,  the  grace  bestowed  on  the  Corinthians,  or 
the  good  effect  anticipated  from  their  liberality.  Confident 
that  the  Corinthians  would  be  liberal,  and  that  their  liberality 
would  excite  the  gratitude  of  their  suffering  brethren,  and 
cement  the  union  between  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  converts, 
the  apostle  breaks  forth  in  this  expression  of  thanksgiving  to 
God,  for  bringing  about  so  haj^py  a  consummation.  But  the 
language  is  too  strong  for  this.  God's  unspeakable  gift  is  his 
Son.     This,  according  to  the  analogy  of  Scripture,  is  that  one 


228  II.   CORINTHIANS   10. 

great,  supreme,  all-comprehending  gift,  which  is  here  intend 
ed.  This  is  the  more  natural,  because  it  is  Paul's  wont,  when 
speaking  either  of  the  feeble  love,  or  trivial  gifts  of  believers, 
one  to  another,  to  refer  in  contrast  to  the  infinite  love  and 
unspeakable  gift  of  God  in  Christ  to  us.  8,  9.  Eph.  5,  1.  It  is 
his  habit  also  to  introduce  ejaculations  of  adoration  or  thanks^ 
giving  into  the  midst,  or  at  the  close  of  his  teachings  or  ex- 
hortations. Rom.  1,  25.  9,  5.  1  Cor.  15,  17.  1  Tim.  1,  17.  The 
passage,  therefore,  ought  to  stand,  as  we  doubt  not  the  vast 
majority  of  the  readers  of  the  Bible  understand  it,  as  an  out- 
burst of  gratitude  to  God  for  the  gift  of  his  Son. 


CHAPTER  X. 


Paul  deprecates  the  necessity  of  asserting  his  authority  and  of  exercising  his 
power  to  punish  the  disobedient,  vs.  1-6.  He  confronts  his  opposera 
with  the  assertion  of  divinely  derived  power,  vs.  9-11.  He  shows  that 
he  claims  authority  only  over  those  who  were  committed  to  his  care, 
vs.  12-18. 

J^auPs  assertion  of  his  authority  and  vindication  of  his 
apostolic  prerogatives. 

The  remarkable  change  in  the  whole  tone  and  style  of  this 
portion  of  the  epistle,  from  the  beginning  of  the  10th  chapter 
to  near  the  end  of  the  13th,  has  attracted  the  attention  of 
every  careful  reader.  The  contrast  between  this  and  the  pre- 
ceding portions  of  the  epistle  is  so  great,  that  some  have  con 
eluded  that  they  are  separate  letters,  written  at  different 
times  and  under  different  circumstances.  There  is  no  exter- 
nal authority  for  this  conjecture,  and  it  is  not  only  unneces- 
sary, but  inconsistent  with  the  facts  of  the  case.  The  same 
topics  are  presented,  and  there  is  in  12,  18  reference  to  the 
mission  of  Titus,  spoken  of  in  the  earlier  chaj)tors.  It  is  an 
adequate  explanation  of  the  change  in  question,  that  in  chs. 
1-9,  Paul  had  in  his  mind,  and  was  really  addressing,  t)ie 
faithful  and  obedient  portion  of  the  church,  whereas  he  has 
here  in  view  the  unreasonable  and  wicked  false  teachers  and 
Vheir  adherents,  who  not  only  made  hght  of  his  authority,  but 


II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  1.  229 

corrupted  the  gospel,  which  he  was  appomted  to  propagate 
and  defend.  He  therefore  naturally  assumes  a  tone  of  a^ithor- 
ity  and  severity.  Satisfied  of  his  divine  mission,  and  conscious 
of  supernatural  power,  he  cautioned  them  not  to  rely  too  much 
on  his  forbearance.  He  was  indeed  as  a  man  humble,  and,  if 
they  chose,  insignificant ;  but  there  was  slumbering  in  his  arm 
an  energy  which  they  would  do  well  not  to  provoke.  He  had 
no  desire  to  exercise  in  Corinth  the  authority  with  which 
Christ  had  invested  him  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  down  all 
opposition.  He  would  give  them  a  fair  trial,  and  wait  to  see 
how  far  they  would  be  obedient,  before  he  punished  their  dis- 
obedience, vs.  1-6.  They  should  not  judge  by  appearance, 
or  set  themselves  up  on  the  ground  of  their  fancied  advan- 
tages, because  whatever  they  had,  he  had  in  larger  measure, 
vs.  1.  8.  He  had  no  intention  to  frighten  them  by  his  epistles 
— which  they  said  were  written  in  a  tone  he  would  not  dare 
to  assume  when  present—  for  they  would  find  that,  when  oc- 
casion called  for  it,  he  could  be  as  bold  when  present  as  when 
he  was  absent,  vs.  9-11.  They  were  subject  to  his  apostolic 
authority.  He  usurped  nothing  in  exercising  the  powers  of 
his  office  over  the  churches  which  he  had  himself  founded. 
He  did  not  interfere  with  the  jurisdiction  of  the  other  apos- 
tles, or  undertake  the  special  oversight  of  churches  founded 
by  others.  Macedonia  and  Achaia  were  within  the  sphere  of 
his  operations,  and  he  hoped  to  preach  the  gospel  far  beyond 
those  hmits  in  regions  where  it  had  never  been  heard,  vs. 
12-16.  His  confidence  was  not  self-confidence,  but  confidence 
in  God.  His  self-commendation  amounted  to  nothing,  unless 
the  Lord  commended  him.  Paul  constantly  felt  that  in  him- 
self he  could  do  nothing,  but  in  the  Lord  he  could  do  all 
things,  vs.  17.  18. 

1.  Now  I  Paul  myself  beseech  you,  by  the  meek- 
ness and  gentleness  of  Clirist,  who  in  presence  (am) 
base  among  you,  but  being  absent  am  bold  toward 
you. 

He  enters  without  any  preamble  or  circumlocution  on  his 
new  subject,  and  places  himself  face  to  face  with  his  unscrupu- 
lous opponents.  He  says,  I  Paul  myself.  He  usually  em- 
ploys the  first  person  plural  when  speaking  of  himself.  Here, 
and  throughout  this  context,  he  makes  his  individuality  promi- 


230  II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  1. 

neiit,  in  saying  I.  This  is  rendered  the  more  emphatic  by  thft 
addition  of  the  word  tnijaelf;  avro?  iyo)^  I  myself ,  the  man  wliom 
you  so  despise  and  calumniate.  Comp.  Gal.  5,  2.  Eph.  3,  1. 
Philemon,  19.  In  this  case  the  expression  is  so  emphatic  that 
many  suppose  that  Paul  here  began  to  write  with  his  own 
liand ;  as  though  he  were  so  excited,  that  he  seized  the  pen 
from  his  amanuensis,  and  says,  '  I  Paul  myself  now  write  to 
you.'  This,  however,  is  unnecessary,  and  unsustained  by  any 
thing  in  the  context.  Beseech  you  by  the  meekness  and  gen- 
tleness  of  Christ.  That  is,  the  meekness  and  gentleness  which 
belonged  to  Christ,  and  which,  therefore,  his  disciples  are 
bound  to  imitate.  To  beseech  by  (8ta),  is  to  beseech  on  ac- 
count of,  or  out  of  regard  to.  The  request  is  enforced  by  a 
reference  to  the  obligation  of  Christians  to  be  meek  and  gen- 
tle as  was  their  Lord.  Matt.  11,  29.  Is.  42,  2.  In  Rom.  12,  1, 
we  have  a  similar  expression,  "  I  beseech  you  by  the  mercies 
of  God."  See  Phil.  2,  1.  The  words  Trpadr-*;?  and  i-KiuKcia  dif- 
fer very  much  as  our  words  meekness  and  gentleness  do ;  the 
former  referring  more  to  the  inward  virtue,  the  latter  to  its 
outward  expression.  As  Christians  are  bound  to  be  meek  and 
gentle,  Paul  begged  the  Corinthians  not  to  force  him  to  be 
severe.  He  describes  himself  as  his  oj^posers  described  him, 
as  craven  when  present,  and  a  braggart  when  absent.  Who 
in  presence  am  base  among  you.  In  presence,  kixto.  Trpdo-wTrov, 
coram^  before,  towards  the  face  of  any  one,  here  opposed  to 
rxTToov,  absent.  The  word  raTretvos,  literally,  loio ;  then  lowly, 
humble.  It  is  commonly  used  in  a  good  sense.  Our  Lord 
says  of  himself  that  he  was,  raTreii/ds  r^  KapSta,  lowly  in  heart., 
and  his  followers  are  always  described  as  the  loioly.  But  the 
word  also  means  downcast^  as  in  7,  6,  and  thence  it  sometimes 
expresses  depression  when  it  is  the  effect  of  the  want  of  cour- 
age. This  is  its  meaning  here.  But  being  absent  am  bold 
towards  you.  Bold,  in  the  sense  opposite  to  base,  or  craven. 
This  word  also  (Sappeio)  is  commonly  used  in  a  good  sense, 
5,  6.  It  is  only  the  context  which  gives  it  a  different  shade 
of  meaning.  Paul  was  regarded  by  his  enemies  as  in  heart  a 
coward,  and  his  boldness  as  merely  assumed  when  there  was 
no  danger  to  confront.  No  one  (except  Rilckert)  now  be- 
lieves this.  True  heroism  was  never  more  fully  exemplitied 
than  in  the  life  of  this  apostle,  "svho  against  numbers,  wealth 
and  power,  always  was  true  to  his  convictions;  who  encoun- 
tered all  manner  of  dangers  and  sufferings  in  the  service  of 
Christ,  and  whose  whole  conduct  showed  that  he  was  ready 


II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  2.  231 

not  only  to  be  bound,  but  to  die  for  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus.     Acts  21,  13. 

2.  But  I  beseech  (you),  that  I  may  uot  be  bold 
when  I  am  present  with  that  confidence,  where  s\ith  I 
thuik  to  be  bold  against  some,  which  think  of  us  as  if 
we  w^alked  according  to  the  flesh. 

The  particle  (8e),  hut^  serves  to  resume  the  exhortation  in 
the  first  clause  of  t.  1.  There  it  is  {-rrapaKaXo)  {yxa?)  I  exhort 
you^  here  it  is  (Seo/xat)  I  beseech.  This  shows  that  v/xas  and 
not  -^eoV  is  to  be  supplied  as  the  object  of  the  verlD.  The 
sense  is,  '  I  beseech  you^  not,  '  I  pray  God?  What  Paul  be- 
seeches of  them  is,  that  they  would  not  force  him  to  have 
recourse  to  severity.  This  he  expresses  by  saying,  ro  /xt]  irapinv 
^app^crat,  that  I  raciy  not  he  hold  iche7i  present.  The  article 
(to)  serves  to  render  the  object  of  the  verb  more  prominent ; 
and  Trapiov  is  in  the  nominative  because  the  subject  of  both 
verbs  is  the  same.  To  he  hold,  i.  e.  to  act  with  decision  and 
courage ;  to  exhibit  the  character  which  the  opponents  of  the 
apostle  said  he  assumed  only  when  absent.  With  the  conji- 
dence,  i.  e.  with  the  conviction  of  his  right  to  exercise  the  au- 
thority which  he  claimed,  and  Avith  the  consciousness  of  power 
to  carry  his  decisions  into  effect.  Wfierewith  I  think  ;  Xoyt- 
^o/xat,  winch  means  to  reckon,  to  reason,  and  then,  as  here,  to 
purpose.  Paul  had  determined  in  his  own  mind  that  if  per- 
suasion failed  to  bring  his  oj^ponents  to  a  right  state  of  mind, 
he  would  resort  to  that  power  with  which  God  had  armed 
him  to  put  down  all  opposition.  The  Vulgate  gives  the  word 
Xoyitpfxai  a  passive  sense,  qua  existimor,  '  which  I  am  thought, 
or  supposed  to  assume.'  So  Luther,  "  die  man  mir  zumisset," 
which  men  ascrihe  to  me.  Bengel  and  many  other  commen- 
tators adopt  the  same  interpretation.  This  has  the  advantage 
of  giving  XoyiCofxat  and  the  following  participle  \oyiC,op.ivov<i 
the  same  sense.  But  it  is  objected  to  this  interpretation  that 
it  would  require  a-jroiv  to  be  used.  '  The  confidence  Avlierewith 
I  am  thought  iohe7i  absent  to  assume.'  The  common  interpre- 
tation, therefore,  is  to  be  preferred.  To  he  hold.  The  word 
is  here  not  ^apprja-at  as  before,  but  roX/xTjcrat,  to  dare ;  to  act 
without  fear  and  without  regard  to  consequences.  Pau!  Iiad 
determined,  if  forced  to  it,  to  set  his  opponents  at  defiance 
and  to  act  with  utter  disregard  of  all  they  could  say  or  do. 


232  II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  3. 

The  persons  against  whom  he  had  determined  to  exercise  this 
severity,  were  those  who  think  ofus^  he  says,  as  if  toe  xoaXked 
according- to  the  flesh.  The  word  flesh  sometimes  means  the 
body,  sometimes  it  expresses  the  secondary  idea  of  weakness, 
sometimes,  and  most  frequently  in  Paul's  epistles,  our  corrupt 
nature.  Beza  gives  it  here  the  second  of  these  meanings. 
He  understands  Paul  as  describing  his  opponents  as  those  who 
regarded  him  as  weak  and  cowardly,  or,  as  invested  with 
nothing  more  than  human  powers  (non  alio  praesidio  freti, 
quam  quod  prse  nobis  ferimus),  so  that,  as  Bengel  says,  "they 
may  despise  us  with  impunity."  But  this  is  not  only  incon- 
sistent with  the  scriptural  use  of  the  word  "  to  walk,"  which, 
in  its  figurative  sense,  refers  to  moral  deportment,  but  also 
with  the  familiar  use  of  the  phrase  (Kara  o-apKa),  after  the  flesh. 
See  the  next  verse,  and  Rom.  8,  1.  4.  5.  13.  The  persons  re- 
ferred to  were  those  who  regarded  the  apostle  not  only  as  an 
ordmary  man,  but  as  acting  under  the  control  of  his  corrupt 
nature,  governed  by  selfish  or  malicious  feelings,  and  relying 
on  himself. 


3.  For  though  we  walk  in  the  flesh,  we  do  not  war 
after  the  flesh. 

There  is  here,  so  to  speak,  a  play  on  the  word  flesh,  which 
is  used  in  somewhat  difterent  senses.  Paul  did  indeed  walk 
in  the  flesh,  he  was  a  man,  and  a  mere  man,  not  only  invested 
with  a  body,  but  subject  to  all  the  infirmities  of  human  nature  ; 
but  he  did  not  war  after  the  flesh.  What  was  human  and 
worldly  neither  determined  his  conduct,  nor  was  the  ground 
of  his  confidence.  The  phrase  to  be  in  the  flesh  has  vari- 
ous meanings  according  to  the  connection  in  which  it  is  used. 
In  1  Tim.  3,  16,  it  is  said,  "God  was  manifested  in  the  flesh," 
i.  e.  in  human  nature.  In  Rom.  8,  8.  9,  to  be  "  in  the  flesh," 
means  to  be  in  an  unrenewed  state.  In  Phil.  1,  22.  24,  "to 
live,"  or,  "  to  abide  in  the  flesh,"  means  to  live,  or  abide,  in 
the  body.  Here  the  phrase  has  substantially  the  same  mean- 
ing, but  with  the  accessory  idea  of  weakness  and  exposure  to 
temptation.  'Though  he  was  a  man,  and  therefore  compassed 
with  the  infirmities  incident  to  humanity,  yet,  »S:c.'  "Hie," 
says  Calvin,  "  Amhulare  in  came  significat  in  mundo  versari : 
quod  alibi  dicit,  habitare  in  corpore  (supra  5,  6).  Erat  enim 
inclusus  in  corporis   sui  ergastulo:  sed  hoc  non  impediebat 


II.    CORINTHIANS    10,  4.  233 

quominus  Spiritus  sancti  virtus  mirifice  se  exsereret  in  ejus 
infirmitate." 

Instead  of  the  general  expression  "  to  walk,"  Paul  uses,  in 
the  second  clause,  the  more  specific  term,  "  to  war."  We  war 
not :  ov  o-Tparero/xe^a.  SxpaTcva)  means,  to  go  to  war,  to  make 
a  campaign ;  a-rpareijo/xat  means,  to  serve  as  a  soldier,  to  fight. 
The  war  here  referred  to,  is  that  which  the  apostle  waged 
against  error  and  every  thing  opposed  to  the  gospel.  This 
war,  he  says,  he  did  not  conduct  (Kara  crdpKa)  after  the  flesh  ; 
that  is,  governed  by  the  flesh,  or  relying  on  it.  He  was  not 
guided  by  the  principles  of  ordinary  men,  who  act  under  the 
influence  of  their  corrupt  nature ;  neither  did  he  depend  for 
success  on  any  thing  the  flesh  (i.  e.  human  nature)  could  aflbrd. 
He  was  governed  by  the  Spirit  and  relied  upon  the  Spirit. 
*'  What  Paul  says  of  himself,  is  true  of  all  the  faithful  ministers 
of  Christ.  They  bear  about  an  incomparable  treasure  in 
earthen  vessels.  Therefore,  although  they  are  compassed 
with  infirmities,  nevertheless  the  spiritual  power  of  God  is 
resplendent  in  them." — Calvin.  The  connection  of  this 
verse,  as  indicated  by  the  particle  ydp  (for),  is  either  with 
the  middle  clause  of  the  preceding  verse,  '  I  am  determined 
to  be  bold  towards  the  opponents  of  the  truth,  for  though  I 
walk  in  the  flesh,  I  do  not  war  after  the  flesh ; '  or,  as  is  often 
the  case  in  Paul's  epistles,  the  ydp  refers  to  a  thought  omitted. 
*  Some  think  that  I  walk  after  the  flesh — that  is  not  true — for 
though  I  walk  in  the  flesh,  I  do  not  war  after  it.'  The  latter 
seems  the  more  natural  and  forcible. 


4.  (For  the  weapons  of  our  warfare  (are)  not  car- 
nal, liut  mighty  through  God  to  the  pulling  down  of 
strong  holds). 

This  proves  that  the  main  idea  intended  by  warring  after 
the  flesh,  is  warring  with  human  weapons,  relying  on  human 
resources.  In  the  war  in  which  Paul  was  engaged,  his  confi- 
dence was  not  in  himself,  not  in  human  reason,  not  in  the 
power  of  argument  or  eloquence,  not  in  the  resources  of  cun- 
ning or  management,  but  sim23ly  and  only  in  the  supernatural 
power  of  God.  '  We  war  not  after  the  flesh,  for  our  weapons 
are  not  carnal.'  That  is,  such  as  the  flesh,  or  human  nature, 
furnishes,  and  which  therefore  in  their  own  nature  are  carnal, 
or  human.     By  weapons  is,  of  course,  to  be  understood  all  the 


234  II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  5. 


means  which  the  apostle  employed  in  the  defence  and  propa 
gation  of  the  truth.  Those  means,  he  says,  were  mighty 
through  God.  The  words  are  Sui/ara  rw  ^ew,  which  are  vari- 
ously explained.  Some,  as  Beza,  Grotius  and  others,  give  the 
dative  the  force  of  the  ablative — mighty  by  God — afflatu  Dei^ 
as  Erasmus  expresses  it.  Others  regard  the  expression  as  a 
Hebraic  superlative.  Others  say  the  meaning  is,  mighty /or 
God,  i.  e.  for  his  use,  weapons  which  are  powerful  in  his  hand. 
The  common  explanation  is,  '  mighty  to  God,'  i.  e.  such  means 
as  even  God  himself  regards  as  mighty;  mighty  in  his  estima- 
tion. Of  Nineveh  it  is  said  it  was,  7r6A.ts  fxeyaXr]  rw  ^€(5,  a  city 
great  to  God,  a  version  which  strictly  answers  to  the  Hebrew. 
Reference  is  also  made  to  Acts  7,  20,  where  Moses  is  said  to 
have  been  aar€2o<s  t(5  ^cw,  beautiful  to  God,  i.  e.  in  his  sight ; 
and  2  Peter  3,  14.  These  weapons  were  divinely  pov»^erful  to 
the  2^uUi7ig  down  of  strong  holds,  Trp6^  KaJatpccrtv  6xopoifxdT(i)v. 
The  last  word  is  most  appropriately  rendered  strong  holds,  as 
xl  is  from  6xvp6<;  (from  ex<«^),  halibar,  what  may  be  held,  what 
is  secure  from  assault.  The  opposers  of  the  gospel  felt  that 
they  were  so  entrenched,  so  protected  by  the  fortresses  which 
they  occupied,  that  they  despised  the  ministers  of  Christ  and 
derided  their  efforts.  What  these  strong-holds  were  the 
apostle  tells  us  in  what  follows.  This  verse  is  properly 
marked  as  a  parenthesis,  not  only  in  our  version,  but  in  al- 
most all  the  critical  editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  because 
the  grammatical  construction  of  v.  5  connects  it  immediately 
with  V.  3. 

5.  Casting  down  imaginations,  and  every  high  thing 
that  exalteth  itself  against  the  knowledge  of  God,  Tind 
bringing  into  captivity  every  thought  to  the  obedience 
of  Christ. 

As  just  intimated,  the  participle  KaSaipovvTcg  (jmlling 
doi.cn)  depends  on  the  verb  o-Tpar€t!o/i.e,9a  at  the  end  of  v.  3. 
'  We  war — pulling  down,  &c.'  According  to  this  view  v.  3  is 
parenthetical.  Riickert,  De  Wette  and  others,  however,  on 
the  ground  that  v.  4  contains  the  main  idea,  which  is  carried 
out  in  V,  8,  prefer  considering  tlie  construction  of  the  passage 
as  irregnhir,  the  particii)le  being  used  hei'e  as  in  9,  11.  13. 
Tliey  therefore  connect  this  verse  with  what  immediately  pre- 
cedes     '  Our  weapons  are  mighty — in  that  we  pull  down,  &c.' 


II.    CORIKTHIAl^S    10,  5.  235 

What  the  apostle  was  thus  confident  he  could  cast  down  were 
irnaginations  (Aoytcr/xoL-?),  thoughts^  i.  e.  the  opinions,  or  con- 
victions of  those  Avho  set  themselves  and  the  deductions  of 
their  own  reason  against  the  truth  of  God.  Compare  1  Cor. 
1,  17-31,  and  Rom.  1,  21-23.  And  every  high  thing  ({)i//a)/xa), 
every  tower,  or  fortress ;  the  same  as  6xvp(o/>ia  in  v.  4.  Not 
persons,  but  thoughts,  are  intended  by  this  figure.  It  is  every 
thing  which  the  pride  of  human  reason  exalts  against  the 
knowledge  of  God ;  i.  e.  that  revelation  of  himself  which  God 
has  made  m  the  gospel.  1  Cor.  3,  18-20.  The  conflict  to 
whicli  the  apostle  here  refers  is  that  between  truth  and  error,, 
between  the  wisdom  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of  the  world. 
When  tlie  gospel  was  first  proclaimed  it  found  itself  in  conflict 
with  all  the  forms  of  religion  and  philosophy  then  prevailing 
among  men.  To  the  wise  of  this  world  the  gospel  appeared 
as  foolishness.  It  was,  however,  the  wisdom  and  power  of 
God.  The  conflict  then  begun  has  continued  ever  since,  and 
is  now  as  deadly  as  at  any  former  period.  Men  of  science 
and  philosophers  are  as  confident  in  their  conclusions,  and  as 
much  disposed  to  exalt  themselves,  or  their  opinions  against 
the  knowledge  of  God  as  ever.  There  is  no  doubt  as  to  the 
issue  of  this  contest.  It  is  a  contest  between  God  and  man, 
in  which,  of  course,  God  must  prevail.  The  instructive  lesson 
which  the  apostle  designs  here  to  inculcate  is,  that  this  war- 
fare must  not  be  conducted  on  the  part  of  the  advocates  of 
the  gospel,  with  carnal  weapons.  They  must  not  rely  upon 
their  own  resources  and  attempt  to  overcome  their  enemies 
by  argument.  They  must  not  become  philosophers  and  turn 
the  gospel  into  a  philosophy.  This  would  be  to  make  it  a  hu- 
man conflict  on  both  sides.  It  would  be  human  reason  against 
human  reason,  the  intellect  of  one  man  against  the  intellect  of 
another  man.  Paul  told  the  Corinthians  in  his  former  epistle, 
that  he  did  not  appear  among  them  as  a  philosopher,  but  as  a 
witness ;  he  came  not  with  the  words  of  man's  wisdom ;  he 
did  not  rely  for  success  on  his  powers  of  argument  or  of  per- 
suasion, but  on  the  demonstration  of  the  Spirit.  The  faith, 
which  he  laboured  to  secure,  was  not  to  be  founded  on  the 
wisdom  of  men,  but  on  the  power  of  God ;  not  on  arguments 
addressed  to  the  understanding,  but  on  the  testimony  of  God. 
That  testimony  has  the  same  efiect  which  intuition  has.  It 
reveals  the  truth  to  the  mind  and  conscience  as  self-evident; 
and  therefore  it  cannot  be  resisted.  A  rationalistic  Christian, 
a  philosophizing  theologian,  therefore,  lays  aside  the  divine 


23a  II.   CORINTHIANS    10,  6. 

for  the  hiiman,  the  wisdom  of  God  for  the  wisdom  of  men, 
the  infinite  and  infallible  for  the  finite  and  fallible.  The  suc- 
cess of  the  gospel  depends  on  its  being  presented,  not  as  the 
word  of  man,  but  as  the  word  of  God ;  not  as  something  to 
be  proved,  but  as  something  to  be  believed.  It  was  on  thia 
principle  Paul  acted,  and  hence  he  was  in  no  degree  intimi- 
dated by  the  number,  the  authority,  the  ability,  or  th*)  learn- 
ing of  his  opponents.  He  was  confident  that  he  could  cast 
down  all  their  proud  imaginations,  because  he  relied  not  on 
himself  but  on  God  whose  messenger  he  was. 

A?id  bringing  into  captivity  every  thought^  Trav  vo-qfia. 
This  word  means  either  thought,  or  the  mind,  that  which 
thinks.  3,  14.  4,  4.  Phil.  4,  7.  Hence  it  may  be  translated 
thought,  as  it  is  in  our  version  ;  or  as  in  the  Vulgate,  "  omnem 
inteliectum,"  every  under  standing,  and  by  Luther,  "  alle  Yer- 
nunft."  Although  the  modern  commentators  make  an  outcry 
against  this  latter  translation,  it  really  differs  little  from  the 
former.  It  does  not  matter  much  whether  we  say  that  human 
reason  must  be  subjected,  or  that  all  the  products  of  human 
reason  (every  thought)  must  be  subjected.  It  amounts  to  the 
same  thing.  Both  forms  of  statement  are  equally  true.  It  is 
the  indispensable  condition  of  salvation  that  our  understand- 
ing should  be  brought  into  captivity,  led  submissive,  as  though 
bound,  i?ito  the  obedience  of  Christ,  ets  Ti]v  vTraKorjv  tov  XptarTov. 
Agreeably  to  the  figure  in  the  context,  the  obedience  of  Christ 
is  conceived  of  as  a  place,  or  fortress,  into  which  the  captive 
is  led.  The  sense  is  the  same  as  the  dative,  rfj  vTraKorj  tov  Xptcr- 
Tov,  would  have  expressed.  We  must  renounce  dependence 
on  our  own  understanding  and  submit  implicitly,  as  obedient 
children,  to  the  teaching  of  Christ.  He  who  would  be  wise, 
must  become  a  fool.   1  Cor.  3,  18. 

6.  And  having  in  a  readiness  to  revenge  all  diso- 
bedience, when  your  obedience  is  fulfilled. 

And  hamng  in  a  readiness  y  cv  eTOi/jiw  exovT€<;,  holding  our- 
selves ready,  i.  e.  being  ready.  He  had  the  ability  and  the 
determniation  to  do  what  he  declares  he  would  do.  Com- 
pare iroLfjuj}^  €xoi,  12,14.  The  participle  cx^vre*;  is  connected 
by  Kat  with  KaSaipowres  of  the  preceding  verse.  *  We  war — 
easting  down  all  that  opposes  itself— and  ready,  &c.'  To 
avenge  all  disobedience  /  cVStK^o-ttt,  to  maintain,  or  to  exact 
justice,  or  satisfaction,  to  punish.     All  disobedience,  i.  e.  every 


II.   CORINTHIAXS   10,  7.  237 

case  of  disobedience.  The  gospel,  being  the  word  of  God,  is 
divinely  efficacious,  and  is  certain  ultimately  to  triumph  over 
all  opposition.  This,  however,  does  not  imply  that  all  will 
obey  it.  In  the  apostolic  churches,  there  were  those  who  cor- 
rupted the  word  of  God,  Judaizing  or  philosophizing  teachers 
and  their  followers,  w^ho  refused  to  obey  the  truth.  Such 
persons  Paul  announced  his  ability  and  his  determination  to 
punish.  They  were  in  the  church,  for  what,  he  said  in  hig 
former  epistle,  have  I  to  do  to  judge  them  that  are  without? 
1  Cor.  5,  12.  They  had  voluntarily  submitted  themselves  to 
his  jurisdiction,  and  he  therefore  had  a  legitimate  authority 
over  them.  What  was  the  nature  of  the  punishment  which 
he  threatened,  he  does  not  intimate.  It  may  be  that  he  pur 
posed  nothing  more  than  excommunication.  The  foct,  how- 
ever, that  the  apostles  were  armed  with  supernatural  power, 
that  they  exercised  that  power  for  the  punishment  of  offend- 
ers, 1  Cor.  5,  5.  1  Tim.  1,  20,  and  the  whole  tone  of  the  pas- 
sage are  in  favour  of  the  assumption  that  Paul  was  determined 
to  use  all  the  means  at  his  command  to  suppress  the  insolence, 
and  to  destroy  the  power  of  the  corrupters  of  the  truth  in 
Corinth.  He  gives  w4iat  he  had  said  a  special  appHcation  by 
adding,  lohen  your  obedience  is  fulfilled.  That  is,  he  would 
not  resort  to  severity  until  all  other  means  had  failed,  and  un- 
til it  had  become  fully  manifest  who  among  the  Corinthians 
would  submit  to  God,  and  who  would  persist  in  their  disobe- 
dience. 

7.  Do  ye  look  on  things  after  the  outward  appear- 
ance ?  If  any  man  trust  to  himself  that  he  is  Christ's, 
let  him  of  himself  think  this  again,  that,  as  he  (is) 
Christ's,  even  so  (are)  we  Christ's. 

Abrupt  transitions  are  characteristic  of  this  epistle.  Paul 
having  in  the  preceding  verses  so  strongly  asserted  his  apos- 
tolic authority  and  supernatural  power,  turns  to  those  who 
denied  the  validity  of  his  claims,  and  calls  upon  them  to  give 
a  reason  for  skepticism.  He  was  thus  led  to  vindicate  his 
title  to  the  apostolic  office  and  to  his  special  jurisdiction  over 
the  church  of  Corinth.  This  vindication  extends  to  12,  18. 
After  which  he  resumes  the  subject  broached  in  the  preceding 
verses  of  this  chapter,  viz.,  what  he  purposed  to  do  when  he 
again  visited  Corinth. 


•238  II.    CORINTHIANS    10,  7. 

Do  ye  looh  on  things  after  the  outward  appearance  f  ra 
Kara  Trpoaioirov  /SAeTrere.  This  clause  may  be  taken  interroga- 
tively, as  by  most  commentators,  or  imperatively,  or  declara- 
tively.  If  interrogatively,  the  sense  may  be,  'Do  ye  regard, 
or  take  into  view,  only  what  is  external  ?  Do  you  jndge  of 
me  from  my  personal  appearance,  manner,  and  speech  ? '  It 
would  seem  that  a  judgment  founded  on  such  grounds  as 
these,  led  the  false  teachers  to  regard  the  apostle  with  con- 
tempt. Or,  the  meaning  is,  'Do  you  regard  only  external 
advantages?  Such  as  being  a  minister  of  Christ,  being  a  He- 
brew, an  Israelite,  of  the  seed  of  Abraham,  <fec.'  11,  22.  In 
favour  of  this  view  is  the  use  of  Trpoawirov  in  this  epistle,  5,  12. 
11,  1.  See  also  Matt.  22,  16.  Mark  12,  14  ;  the  parallel  passage 
in  11,  18  (where  Kara  t^v  adpKa  answers  to  Kara  TTpoa-ioTTov  here) ; 
and  the  context,  which  goes  to  show  that  the  things  which 
Paul's  opponents  regarded,  and  on  which  they  prided  them- 
selves, were  their  supposed  external  advantages.  Those  who 
take  ySA-eVere  as  imperative  understand  the  passage  thus: 
'  Look  at  what  is  before  your  eyes,  i.  e.  at  Avhat  is  evident  to 
all.  If  you  are  thus  and  so,  so  am  I.'  Calvin  and  others  take 
the  verb  as  in  the  indicative.  '  Ye  do  regard  what  is  external 
— and  therefore  despise  me.'  The  first  interpretation,  for  the 
reasons  stated,  is  to  be  preferred.  If  any  man  trust  to  him- 
self. The  use  of  tU  (any  one),  in  this  passage,  and  of  the 
singular  number  in  vs.  10  and  11,  and  in  11,  4,  has  led  to  the 
conjecture  that  there  was  in  Corinth  one  particular  opponent 
of  the  apostle  to  whom  in  this  whole  context  he  refers.  But 
it  is  evident  fi'om  the  general  drift  of  the  epistle  that  it  was  a 
whole  class  of  jjersons  who  had  arrayed  themselves  against 
Paul's  authority.  Trust  to  himself  TreVoi^ev  cavrw,  is  persuad- 
ed concerning  himself,  that  he  is  Chrisfs.  What  that  means 
is  somewhat  doubtful.  It  may  be  taken  in  the  most  general 
sense,  '  If  any  thinks  that  he  is  a  Christian,'  i.  e.  belongs  to 
Christ  as  every  believer  does ;  or,  '  If  any  man  thinks  that  he 
is  a  minister  of  Christ ; '  or,  '  If  any  man  thinks  that  he  stands 
in  a  peculiar  relation  to  Christ.'  It  is  probable  from  1  Cor. 
1,  10  that  there  were  certain  persons  in  Corinth  who  said, 
'  We  are  of  Christ,'  as  claiming  some  nearer  connection  with 
him  than  that  wliich  belonged  to  other  believers  or  to  other 
ministers.  Whether  this  claim  rested  on  their  having  seen 
Christ  in  the  flesh,  or  on  relationship  to  his  kinsmen,  is  mere 
matter  of  conjecture.  Still  as  the  claim  existed,  it  is  most 
likely  referred  to  here.     Z/et  him  of  himself  i.  e.  without  its 


II.    CORINTHIANS    10,  8.  239 

being  suggested  by  others.  The  fact  was  so  plain  that  it 
needed  not  to  be  asserted.  Let  him  think  this  again^  i.  e.  let 
him  consider  the  matter  again.  The  last  reflection  mil  con- 
vince him  that  as  he  is  ChrisVs^  so  are  we.  There  was  no  re- 
lationship which  these  false  teachers  could  rightfully  claim  to 
Christ  to  which  Paul  was  not  equally  entitled.  They  were  in 
no  res])ect  his  superiors.  They  had  no  advantage  which  did 
not  belong  equally  to  him. 

8.  For  though  I  should  boast  somewhat  more  of 
our  authority,  which  the  Lord  hath  given  us  for  edifi- 
cation, and  not  for  your  destruction,  I  should  not  be 
ashamed. 

Paul  might  have  said  much  more  than  he  had  said  in  what 
precedes.  He  was  not  only  all  that  his  opponents  claimed  to 
be,  but  more.  He  had  an  authority  and  power  to  which  they 
could  make  no  pretensions.  He  therefore  here  says  that  if  he 
had  set  forth  higher  claims,  he  should  not  be  ashamed — facts 
would  not  prove  those  claims  to  be  unfounded.  For  though^ 
lav  re  yap  /cat,  for  eveti  in  case,  &G.  The  connection  is  with 
the  words  "  we  are  Christ's."  '  We  are  Christ's,  in  all  the 
senses  in  which  you  can  claim  to  be,  for  we  have  received 
more  from  him.'  The  greater  includes  the  less,  /Somewhat 
more,  Trcpio-o-orcpoV  Ti,  i.  e.  somewhat  more  than  was  claimed  in 
vs.  3-6,  or  more  than  '  being  in  Christ,'  which  might  be  said 
of  others  as  well  as  of  the  apostle.  Paul  had  an  authority/ 
which  extended  beyond  the  limits  of  any  claim  which  he  had 
yet  advanced.  E^ovaia  includes  the  ideas  of  power  and  au- 
thority. The  apostle  had  authority  (i.  e.  the  right  to  rule) 
and  he  had  ability,  inherent  power,  to  enforce  that  authority. 
Which  the  Lord  hath  given  (or  rather,  gave)  to  us.  The  au- 
thority in  question  was  given  when  he  was  constituted  an 
apostle,  with  not  only  a  commission  to  exercise  dominion,  but 
a  grace,  or  inward  gift  of  the  Spirit,  rendering  him  infallible 
as  a  teacher  and  investing  him  with  supernatural  power.  The 
giver  of  this  authority  and  power  was  the  Lord,  i.  e.  Christ. 
Christ,  therefore,  as  the  author  of  supernatural  gifts,  is  a  di- 
vine person,  for  to  give  such  gifts  is  a  prerogative  of  God. 
The  design  for  which  Paul  was  not  endo^ved,  was  not  his  own 
exaltation,  not  the  accomplishment  of  any  worldly  end,  not, 
as  he  says,  "  for  your  destruction,"  i.  e.  not  that  he  might  be 
11 


!Z40  II.    CORINTHIANS    10,  9. 

able  to  put  down  his  personr.l  enemies,  but  for  edification^ 
i.  e.  the  building  up  of  the  church  in  hoUness  and  peace. 
Power  in  the  church  comes  not  from  the  civil  magistrate,  nor 
from  the  people,  but  from  Christ  only.  He  is,  as  Calvin  says, 
Solus  Dominus  et  Magister.  And  this  power  can  be  legiti- 
mately exercised  only  for  the  edification  of  the  church. 
When  exercised  for  other  objects,  or  for  the  destruction  of 
the  church,  then  it  should  be  disowned  and  resisted.  Even 
an  apostle,  or  an  angel  from  heaven,  who  should  preach  any 
other  gospel — teach  or  require  any  thing  contrary  to  the  word 
of  God — would  be  accursed.  And  of  this  contrariety,  from 
the  necessity  of  the  case,  and  from  the  authority  of  Scripture, 
the  people,  i.  e.  those  who  are  required  to  believe  and  obey, 
are  (at  their  peril)  to  be  the  judges.  If  they  reject  a  true 
apostle,  their  sin  is  as  great  as  if  they  gave  ear  to  false  teach- 
ers. Having  the  inward  teaching  of  the  Spirit,  they  know 
of  the  doctrine  whether  it  be  of  God. 

9.  That  I  may  not  seem  as  if  I  would  terrify  you 
by  letters. 

The  connection  of  this  clause  (tVa  /x^  8okw)  is  somewhat 
doubtful.  If  it  belongs  immediately  to  the  j)receding  words, 
the  sense  is,  '  I  should  not  be  ashamed — in  order  that  I  should 
seem,'  i.  e.  God  would  so  order  it  that  I  should  not  appear  as 
an  empty  boaster.  But  this  is  evidently  unnatural.  The  de- 
sign of  God  in  sustaining  the  apostle,  and  giving  him  a  victory 
over  the  enemies  of  the  truth,  was  something  higher  than  pre- 
serving him  from  being  regarded  as  a  boaster.  A  very  large 
number  of  commentators  connect  this  verse  with  the  11th, 
throwing  the  10th  into  a  parenthesis.  'That  I  may  not  seem 
to  terrify  you — let  such  an  one  think,  &c.'  But  neither  in 
this  way  is  the  connection  natural  or  logical;  and  v.  11  evi- 
dently refers  to  v.  10,  and  would  not  be  intelligible  if  that 
verse  were  omitted;  verse  11,  therefore,  is  not  a  parenthesis. 
A  clause  with  Iva.^  as  we  have  seen  before  in  this  epistle,  (com- 
pare also  Gal.  2,  10,)  often  depends  on  some  word  or  words 
omitted  but  easUy  supplied  from  the  context.  In  this  case  we 
may  supply,  '  This  I  say?  '  This  I  say  in  order  that  I  may 
not  appear,  <fec.'  So  Luther  ("Das  sage  ich  aber"),  Beza,  and 
many  others.  As  if  I  loould  terrify^  w?  av  iK^^o^dv.  This  is 
the  only  instance  in  the  New  Testament  where  a.v  after  a  con- 
junction is  used  with  the  infinitive.     Winer  resolves  it  into 


II.   CORINTHIAXS   10,  10.  241 

a)s  av  lK<l>opoiiiL  vfjLOi^,  tanqicam  velim,  vos  terrere^  which  agrees 
with  our  translation.  These  particles  serve  to  soften  the  ex- 
pression, and  are  equivalent  to  as  if  perhaps^  or,  so  to  speak. 
There  is  evident  allusion  to  the  false  representations  made  by 
the  false  teachers,  that  Paul  wrote  in  the  authoritative  tone 
which  he  assumed  merely  to  frighten  his  readers,  having 
neither  the  power  nor  the  purpose  to  carry  his  threats  into 
execution.  By  letters^  or,  hy  the  letters^  i.  e.  the  letters  which 
he  had  already  written  or  intended  to  write. 

10.  For  (his)  letters,  say  they,  (are)  weighty  and 
powerful ;  but  (his)  bodily  presence  (is)  weak,  and  (his) 
speech  contemptible. 

There  was  reason  for  his  not  wishing  to  appear  as  assum- 
ing a  tone  of  threatening  in  his  letters,  for  this  was  the  very 
reproach  cast  upon  him.  His  letters^  they  say.,  {(fiWh  liere,  as 
often,  used  impersonally,  '  one  says,'  sayt  man^)  are  weighty 
(ySapctat,  i.  e.  impressive)  atul jyowerful^  (laxvpat^)  including  the 
ideas  of  vigour,  authority  and  severity.  But  his  bodily  pres- 
ence is  weak.  This  passage,  probably  more  than  any  other, 
has  given  rise  to  the  impression,  in  accordance  with  a  tradi- 
tion neither  very  ancient  nor  well  sustained,  that  Paul  was 
small  in  stature,  weak  and  unattractive  in  his  personal  appear- 
ance. The  words  here  used,  however,  even  supposing  that 
this  language  of  his  enemies  expressed  the  truth,  do  not  neces- 
sarily imply  this.  The  phrase  r]  irapova-La  toO  aoj/xaTos  probably 
refers  not  to  his  personal  appearance,  but  to  his  deportment. 
He  wrote  boldly,  but  acted  feebly.  There  was  not  that  ener- 
gy and  decision  in  his  acts  which  one  would  expect  from  his 
language.  This  was  the  representation  of  his  enemies;  the 
truth  of  which,  however,  the  apostle  denies.  The  same  re- 
mark applies  to  the  next  clause,  his  speech  contemptible.  This 
does  not  refer  to  feebleness  of  voice,  but  to  the  impression 
made  by  his  oral  instructions  and  addresses.  He  dared  not 
assume  any  such  authority  in  speaking  to  the  people  that  he 
did  in  writing  to  them.  The  whole  history  of  the  apostle,  his 
unceasing  labours,  his  constant  journeyings,  his  innumerable 
sufferings  which  he  sustained  so  heroically,  prove  that  he  was 
not  physically  a  man  of  feeble  constitution.  And  his  own 
declarations,  as  well  as  his  clearly  revealed  character,  prove 
that  there  was  no  such  want  of  correspondence  between  hia 


242  II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  11.12. 

letters  and  his  actions  as  the  false  teachers  in  Corinth,  to  whom 
he  was  probably  personally  unknown,  endeavoured  to  make 
the  people  believe. 

11.  Let  sucJi  an  one  think  this,  that  such  as  we  are 
in  word  by  letters  when  we  are  absent,  such  (will  we 
be)  also  in  deed  when  we  are  present. 

J^et  such  an  one^  i.  e.  any  one,  not  necessarily  implying 
that  there  was  only  one  person  who  had  set  himself  up  in  op- 
position to  the  apostle.  That  such  as  we  are  in  word^  &c. 
It  was  admitted  that  his  letters  were  energetic.  He  assures 
them  that,  when  present,  his  deeds  would  correspond  to  his 
w^ords.     His  denunciations  would  not  prove  idle  threats. 

12.  For  we  dare  not  make  ourselves  of  the  number, 
or  compare  ourselves  with  some  that  commend  them- 
selves :  but  they,  measuring  themselves  by  themselves, 
and  comparing  themselves  among  themselves,  are  not 
wise. 

In  confirmation  of  his  declaration  that  his  acts  would  be 
found  to  correspond  with  his  words,  he  adds,  '  For  I  am  not 
like  those,  who  having  nothing  to  recommend  them,  commend 
themselves.'  We  dare  not  {ov  roXfxCjfjiev,  we  cannot  bring  our- 
selves to,  or,  we  cannot  prevail  on  ourselves  to.  Rom.  5,  V. 
1  Cor.  6,  1)  make  ourselves  of  the  7iumher^  or  compare  our- 
selves;  {h/Kpivai  rj  (TvyKpivai^  enrol  ourselves  among,  or  place 
ourselves  by,)  soTne  who  commend  themselves.  The  reference 
is  obviously  to  the  false  teachers,  whose  only  reliance  was  self- 
laudation.  So  far  this  verse  is  plain.  The  latter  part  of  the 
passage  is  exceedingly  difficult,  and  has  been  very  variously 
explained.  There  are  three  classes  of  interpretation,  two  of 
which  proceed  on  the  assumption  of  the  correctness  of  the 
common  text,  and  the  third  is  founded  on  a  diiferent  reading. 
According  to  the  first  general  view,  the  avroi  refers  to  the 
apostle  himself.  He  is  assumed  to  contrast  himself,  in  this 
verse,  with  his  opponents.  The  sense,  according  to  some 
then  is,  'They  commend  themselves,  but  we,  measuring  our- 
selves by  ourselves,  (i.  e.  Ave  do  not  overestimate  ourselves, 
but   determine   our  importance   by  our   performances,)   ftnd 


II.    CORII^THIANS    10,  12.  243 

com])aring  ourselves  with  ourselves,  not  with  these  wise  men.' 
According  to  this  view,  orvvtovaLv,  at  the  end  of  the  verse,  is  a 
participle,  and  is  used  ironically  in  reference  to  the  folse  teach- 
ers. To  this  interpretation  it  is  objected,  1.  That  a-wiova-Lv 
would  require  the  article  in  order  to  express  the  meaning 
s^iven  to  it ;  and  2.  That  it  is  plainly  inconsistent  with  the 
T7/xets  8e  of  the  next  verse,  which  are  antithetical  to  the  aurot 
of  this  verse.  '  They  do  so — but  we  do  so.'  Others,  who 
make  the  latter  part  of  this  verse  refer  to  the  apostle,  refer 
avvLova-Lv  also  to  him.'  'We  measure  ourselves  by  ourselves, 
and  compare  ourselves  with  ourselves,  we  who,  as  they  say, 
are  unwise.'  Then  the  17/Aets  8e  of  verse  13th  refers  to  this  Is^st 
clause.  'They  say  we  are  unwise,  but  we,  &c.'  This,  how- 
ever, is  liable  to  the  same  objections,  and  gives  a  sense  un- 
suited  to  the  context.  According  to  the  second  interpreta- 
tion, avTOL  in  this  verse  refers  to  the  false  teachers,  with  whom, 
in  the  next  verse,  Paul  contrasts  himself,  (17/xcts  8e,)  and  awe- 
ovaLv  is  the  third  person  plural,  as  from  tlie  verb  (rvviioi,  as  in 
Matt.  13,  13.  'They  measuring  themselves  by  themselves, 
and  comparing  themselves  with  themselves,  are  not  wise ;  but 
we,  &c.'  This  is  the  view  of  the  passage  adopted  by  our 
translators,  after  Chrysostom,  Calvin,  and  Luther.  It  is  also 
sanctioned  by  De  Wette,  Meyer,  and  Ruckert,  and  many  oth- 
ers. These  false  teachers  commended  themselves,  confined 
their  views  to  themselves,  despised  or  disregarded  all  others, 
intruding  into  other  men's  labours.  Paul,  on  the  contrary, 
boasted  not  of  himself;  he  relied  only  on  God  and  his  grace, 
and  he  kept  himself  within  his  own  limits,  not  appropriating 
to  himself  the  fruits  of  the  labours  of  other  men.  The  third 
mode  of  interpreting  this  passage  assumes  that  the  text  aiford- 
ed  by  th<j  Western,  as  distinguished  from  the  Eastern  manu- 
scripts, is  correct.  Those  authorities  omit  ov  awiova-t,  -q^d^i  8e, 
so  that  avToi  (i7f(.a9)  is  the  nominative  to  Kavxqcroix^^a  in  v.  13, 
if  that  verb  be  retained.  '  They  commend  themselves ;  but 
we,  measuring  ourselves  by  ourselves,  and  comparing  our- 
selves with  ourselves,  will  not  boast  as  to  things  beyond  our 
measure.'  Fritsche  and  Billroth,  on  the  authority  of  the  Co- 
dex Clarom.,  omit  also  Kavxqa-oixeSa,  and  connect  the  participles 
fxer^ovvTes  and  (TvyKpivovT€<i  with  Kav;((i)/xci/ot  of  V.  15,  thus  bring- 
ing out  substantially  the  same  sense,  but  rendering  the  sen- 
tence longer  and  more  complicated.  The  meaning  afforded 
by  this  new  reading  is  simple  and  pertinent.  Since,  however, 
ihe  critical  authorities  by  which  it  is  supported  are  compare 


244  II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  13. 


tively  few  and  of  a  secondary  class,  the  great  body  of  editors 
adhere  to  the  common  text.  If  that  text  is  correct,  then  the 
interpretation  given  in  our  Enghsh  version  is  the  most  natural 
and  suitable.  Calvin  applies  this  whole  passage,  with  his 
usual  vigour,  to  the  monks  of  his  day.  Hujus  loci  expositio 
non  aliunde  petenda  est  quam  a  monachis:  nam  quum  sint 
omnes  fere  indoctissimi  asini,  et  tamen  oblongae  vestis  et  cu- 
culli  causa  docti  censeantur :  si  quis  tenuem  modo  gustum  ele- 
gantioris  literaturae  habeat,  plumas  suas  instar  pavonis  fastuose 
extendit :  spargitur  de  eo  mirabilis  fama,  adoratur  inter 
sodales.  At  si  seposita  cuculli  larva  ventum  fuerit  ad  justum 
examen,  deprehenditur  vanitas.  Cur  hoc?  Verum  quidem 
est  vetus  pi'overbium :  Audax  inscitia :  sed  inde  praecipue 
monachalis  insolentissimus  ille  fiistus,  quod  se  metiuntur  ex  se 
ipsis :  nam  quum  in  eorum  claustris  nihil  sit  praeter  barbari- 
em,  illic  nihil  mirum,  si  regnet  luscus  inter  csecos. 

13.  But  we  will  not  boast  of  tilings  without  (our) 
measure,  but  according  to  the  measure  of  the  rule 
which  God  hath  distributed  to  us,  a  measure  to  reach 
even  unto  you. 

Tlie  words  ds  to.  afxerpa  may  be  taken  adverbially,  equiva- 
lent to  oijjierpbig,  ifnmoderateli/^  beyond  what  is  proper;  or, 
since  in  the  latter  part  of  the  verse  fxirpov  is  used  literally,  they 
may  be  explained  as  in  our  version,  in  reference  to  things  be- 
yond our  measure,  i.  e.  beyond  the  limits  of  my  apostolic  la- 
bours. This  idea  is  clearly  presented  in  the  following  verses ; 
but  here  tlie  contrast  with  the  preceding  verse  favours  the 
former  explanation.  The  false  teachers  set  no  limits  to  their 
boasting — sell-conceit  and  not  facts  determined  the  character 
and  amount  of  their  assumptions,  and  therefore  their  claims 
were  inordinate.  Paul  expresses  his  determination  to  limit 
his  claims  to  his  actual  gitts  and  labours.  According  to  the 
measure  of  the  rule^  Kara  t6  jxeTpuv  tov  Kavovo?,  i.  e.  according 
to  the  measure  detei-mined  by  the  rule,  or  line,  that  is,  the 
measure  allotted  to  him.  Tlie  Kavojv  is  the  rule,  or  measuring 
line,  which,  so  to  speak,  God  used  in  determining  the  apostle's 
gilts  and  sphere  of  activity.  Paul's  boasting,  therefore,  was 
not  immoderate,  but  confined  to  just  limits.  According  to 
Beza  Kavujv  is  used  nietonyniically  for  that  wliich  is  measured ; 
certum  et  definitum  spatium ;  the  district  or  diocese  measured 


II.   CORIXTHIANS   10,  13.  245 

off  to  him.  But  this  is  not  consistent  T\'ith  the  ordinary  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  or  with  the  context.  Which  God  hath  dis- 
tributed  to  its  j  ov  Ijxepia-ev  rjfjuv  6  ^eos  fxerpov^  for  fxerpov  6  ifxept' 
crev  6  ^eos,  by  attraction.  This  clause  is  in  apposition  Avith 
Kawvos,  and  explains  what  was  the  rule  or  line  which  deter- 
mined the  sphere  of  his  activity.  It  was  not  something  self- 
assumed,  or  self-applied,  but  something  which  God  had 
appointed  ;  a  measure,  he  adds,  to  reach  even  unto  you.  It  is 
agreeable  to  Paul's  manner  to  include  two  or  more  related 
ideas  in  the  same  form  of  expression.  To  boast  according  to 
the  measure  assigned  him^  may  mean  to  regulate  his  boasting 
according  to  his  gifts ;  or,  to  boast  in  reference  to  Avhat  was 
done  within  the  limits  assigned  him  in  preaching  the  gospel. 
Both  ideas  are  here  united.  In  opposition  to  the  false  teach- 
ers, who  not  only  boasted  of  gifts  which  they  did  not  possess, 
but  appropriated  to  themselves  the  fruits  of  other  men's  la- 
bours by  intruding  into  churches  which  they  had  not  founded, 
Paul  says  he  did  neither  one  nor  the  other.  His  boasting  was 
neither  immoderate,  nor  was  it  founded  on  what  others  had 
done.  He  invaded  no  man's  sphere  of  labour.  It  was  his  set- 
tled purpose  to  preach  the  gospel  where  Christ  had  not  been 
named,  and  not  to  build  on  another  man's  foundation.  Rom. 
15,  20.  Acting  on  this  principle  he  had  the  right  to  regard 
Corinth  as  legitimately  within  his  field.  His  assigned  limit  of 
labour  reached  at  least  that  far.  He  had  founded  the  church 
in  that  city;  others  had  built  thereon.  1  Cor.  3,  10.  The 
Corinthians  were  his  work  in  the  Lord.  1  Cor.  9,  1.  Over 
them,  therefore,  if  over  no  others,  he  had  the  authority  of  an 
apostle.  It  is  plain,  on  the  one  hand,  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment that  the  apostles  had  a  general  agreement  among  them- 
selves as  to  their  several  fields  of  labour.  Paul  was  to  go  to 
the  Gentiles  ;  Peter,  James  and  John  to  the  Jews.  Gal.  2,  9. 
But  it  is  no  less  plain  that  they  were  not  confined  to  any  pre- 
scribed limits.  They  had  not,  as  modern  bishops  or  pastors, 
each  his  particular  diocese  or  parish.  As  their  authority  did 
not  arise  from  their  election  or  appointment  to  a  particular 
church  or  district,  but  from  their  plenary  knowledge,  infalli- 
bility, and  supernatural  power,  it  was  the  same  everywhere, 
and  in  relation  to  all  churches.  Hence  we  find  Paul  writing 
lo  the  church  in  Rome  which  he  had  never  visited,  as  well  as 
to  others  who  had  never  seen  his  face  in  the  flesh,  with  the 
same  authority  with  which  he  addressed  churches  which  he 
had  himself  planted.     Peter  addressed  his  epistles  to  churches 


246  II.   CORINTHIAIS^S   10,  14.15. 

within  Paul's  sphere  of  labour ;  and,  according  to  all  traditior:, 
St.  John  presided  during  the  latter  years  of  his  life  over  the 
churches  in  Asia  Minor,  founded  by  the  apostle  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. Still  it  was  a  matter  of  courtesy  that  one  apostle  should 
not  intrude  unnecessarily  upon  the  sphere  already  occupied  by 
another.  Paul,  at  least,  determined  that  he  would  not  build 
upon  another  man's  foundation. 

14.  Por  we  stretch  not  ourselves  beyond  (our 
measure),  as  though  we  reached  not  unto  you ;  for 
we  are  come  as  far  as  to  you  also  in  (preaching)  the 
gospel  of  Christ. 

This  verse  is  generally  regarded  as  a  parenthesis,  although 
some  commentators  make  it  the  beginning  of  a  new  sentence. 
It  is  logically  connected  with  the  last  clause  of  v.  13.  '  God 
assigned  us  a  measure  extending  to  you,  for  not,  as  not  reach- 
ing to  you,  do  we  unduly  stretch  ourselves  out ; '  virepcKTuvo' 
fxiv  eavTovs,  do  toe  overstretch  ourselves.  The  present  tense  is 
used,  because  the  reference  is  to  the  sphere  of  the  apostle's 
authority.  For  we  have  come  as  far  as  you,  (e<f>^d<raixev.) 
'  Our  authority  extends  to  you,  for  we  have  come  to  you  in 
preaching  the  gospel.'  That  is,  Corinth  was  included  in  the 
region  throughout  which  he  had  been  the  iirst  to  preach 
Christ.  The  word  ^^avw  properly  means,  to  come,  or  b»,  be- 
forehand ;  to  anticipate ;  and  then,  in  the  aorist,  to  have  come 
already.  See  Matt.  12,  28.  Phil.  3,  16.  1  Thess.  2,  16.  This 
sense  may  be  retained  here.  '  We  have  already  come  even 
unto  you.'  He  had  already  reached  them  and  expected  soon 
to  reach  beyond  them ;  see  v.  16. 

15.  Not  boasting  of  things  without  (our)  measure, 
(that  is),  of  other  men's  labours ;  but  having  hope, 
when  your  faith  is  increased,  that  we  shall  be  enlarged 
by  you,  according  to  our  rule  abundantly. 

If  verse  14  is  parenthetical,  then  this  verse  is  connected 
with  the  13th.  'We  will  boast  according  to  our  measure — ■ 
not  boasting  immoderately.'  Of  other  me)i?s  laboure.  This 
is  explanatory  of  the  eis  ra  a/Aerpa.  Ho  did  not  boast  of  what 
other  men  had  done.  If  the  connection  is  with  the  14th  verse, 
the  participle  Kavp^w/xcrot  most  naturally  depends  on  ov  {iTrepc-c. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  15.  241 

rctVo/xcv.  'We  do  not  stretch  ourselves  unduly — not  boasting, 
&c.'  The  reproach  to  the  false  teachers  here  implied  is  of 
course  obvious.  They  had  done  what  Paul  refused  to  do. 
They  came  to  Corinth  after  the  church  had  been  gathered, 
assumed  an  authority  to  which  they  were  not  entitled,  and 
endeavoured  to  destroy  the  influence  of  the  apostle  to  whom 
the  church  owed  its  existence,  and  the  people  their  liope  of 
salvation.  Jam,  says  Calvin,  liberius  pungit  pseudo-apostolos, 
qui  quum  in  alienam  messem  manus  intulissent,  audebant 
tamen  iis  obtrectare,  qui  sudore  ac  industria  locum  illis  para- 
verant. 

£ut  havhig  hojye,  ichen  your  faith  is  increased.  This 
clause  the  Yulgate  renders,  '  Habentes  spera  crescentis  fidei 
vestrae.'  This  interpretation  the  words  av^Wo/xei/T^s  rr\^  -rricrrecos 
{your  faith  being  increased)  do  not  admit.  Corinth  was  not 
the  limit  which  Paul  had  fixed  for  his  field  of  labour.  He  had 
the  purpose,  as  soon  as  the  state  of  the  Corinthians  would 
allow  of  his  leaving  them,  to  press  forward  to  preach  the  gos- 
pel in  regions  beyond  them.  That  we  shall  be  enlarged  by 
you^  Iv  v/xlv  ixeyakvv^rjvaL.  Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  and  others, 
connect  iv  vfxtv  with  the  preceding  clause — '  Your  faith  being 
increased  among  you.'  Beza  says  this  is  required  by  the  op- 
posite clause,  as  the  advantage  was  mutual.  They  were  to 
grow  in  faith  among  themselves,  he  was  to  enlarge  his  boun- 
daries. But  in  this  case  the  words  cV  v/Atv  are  redundant. 
They  belong  to  the  following  word,  and  are  to  be  rendered 
either  by  you,  or,  a?no?ig  you.  This  depends  on  the  sense 
given  to  fjL^yaXw^rjvaL.  This  word  is  used  either  literally,  as  in 
Matt.  23,5,  "They  make  broad  their  phylacteries;"  or  figu- 
ratively, as  in  Luke  1,58,  "The  Lord  hath  made  great  his 
mercy  toward  her."  In  every  other  case  where  it  occurs  in 
the  New  Testament  it  means  to  praise,  to  declare  great. 
Luke  1,  46,  "My  soul  doth  magnify  the  Lord."  So  in  Acts 
5,13.  10,46.  19,17.  Phil.  1,20.  This  meaning  of  the  word 
is  very  conuiionly  retained  here.  '  I  hope  to  be  honoured  by 
you  abundantly.'  But  the  object  of  the  apostle's  hope  was 
neither  to  be  glorified  by  them,  nor  among  them.  Besides, 
the  following  clause  ('  according  to  our  rule ')  does  not  agree 
with  this  interpretation.  The  word,  therefore,  is  to  be  taken 
in  its  more  literal  sense — '  He  hoped  to  be  enlarged  abundant- 
ly (ets  Trepiaadav)  according  to  his  rule.'  That  is,  he  hoped  to 
preach  the  gospel  far  beyond  Corinth,  agreeably  to  the  lino 
of  action  marked  out  for  him.  The  eV  vixlv  may  then  be  reu- 
11* 


248  II.   CORINTHIANS   10,  16-18. 

dered,  vobis  adjuvantibus.  They  -u^ould  aid  Paul  in  his  future 
labours.  The  same  idea  is  brought  out  by  rendering  the 
clause  thus,  '  To  become  great  among  you  as  to  that  which  is 
beyond.' 

]  6.  To  preach  tlie  gospel  in  the  (regions)  beyond 
you,  (and)  not  to  boast  in  another  man's  Hue  of  things 
made  ready  to  om-  hand. 

This  infinitive  (to  preach)  is  either  exegetical,  '  We  hope 
to  be  enlarged,  that  is,  we  hope  to  preach  beyond  you ; '  or  it 
is  the  infinitive  of  the  object,  'We  hope  to  become  great 
among  you,  in  order  to  preach,  &c.'  The  choice  between 
these  explanations  depends  on  the  interpretation  of  the  pre- 
ceding verse.  To  preach  the  gosj^el  in  the  regions  beyond 
you ;  CIS  viT€p€Kuva  (an  adverb,  heyond\  parts  beyond,  and 
with  L'/xtoy,  j>j)rtrjf5  beyond  you.  Ets  is  not  here  for  ev,  but  means 
unto,  as  expressing  the  extent  to  w^hich.  N'ot  to  boast  in  an- 
other man''s  line  y  Iv  aWoTpCio  Kavovt,  within  another's  line. 
That  is,  within  the  field  of  labour  occupied  by  another  man. 
Made  ready  to  our  hand.  This  is  not  a  literal  translation  of 
€ts  TO.  hoijxa.  These  words  belong  to  Kav^^o-acr^ai,  'Not  to 
boast  in  reference  to  things  prepared.'  The  sense  is  plain; 
he  would  not  appropriate  to  himself  the  fruits  of  other  men's 
labours. 

17.  18.  But  he  that  glorieth,  let  him  glory  in  the 
Lord.  For  not  he  that  commendeth  himself  is  ap- 
proved, but  whom  the  Lord  commendeth. 

'  To  glory  in  the  Lord,'  is  either  to  regard  God  as  the 
ground  of  confidence  and  source  of  all  good,  and  to  ascribe 
every  thing  we  have,  are,  and  hope  to  his  grace ;  or,  it  is  to 
exult  in  his  approbation.  Instead  of  comforting  ourselves 
with  our  own  high  estimate  of  our  attainments  and  efficiency, 
or  allowing  ourselves  to  be  inflated  by  the  applause  of  men, 
we  should  be  satisfied  with  nothing  short  of  the  divine  appro- 
bation. The  connection  is  here  in  fiivour  of  the  latter  view. 
'He  that  glories  should  glory  in  the  Lord,  i.  e.  he  that  re- 
joices should  rejoice  in  the  approbation  of  God,  (not  in  his 
own  good  opinion  of  himself,  nor  in  the  praises  of  others,) /'of 
not  he  who  commendeth  himself  is  approved,  i.  e.  is  really 


II.   CORINTHIANS   11.  249 

worthy  of  approbation,  but  he  whom  the  Lord  commendeth.' 
Paul  did  not  commend  himself;  his  claims  were  not  founded 
on  the  suggestions  of  self-conceit ;  neither  did  he  rely  on  the 
commendation  of  others,  his  eye  was  fixed  on  God.  If  he 
could  secure  his  favour,  it  was  to  him  a  small  matter  to  be 
judged  by  man's  judgment.     1  Cor.  4,  3. 


CHAPTER   XI. 


The  apostle  apologizes  for  the  self-commendation  which  was  forced  ^pon 
him,  vs.  1-15.  He  contrasts  himself  and  his  labours  with  the  assump- 
tions of  the  false  teachers,  vs.  15-33. 

Reasons  for  his  self-commendation^  vs.  1-15. 

He  had  just  condemned  all  self-commendation,  yet  he  was 
forced  to  do  what  had  the  appearance  of  self-laudation.  The 
Corinthians  were  in  danger  of  being  turned  away  from  Christ 
by  having  their  confidence  in  Paul  nndermined  by  the  mis- 
representations of  his  enemies.  It  was  therefore  necessary 
for  him  to  present  the  grounds  which  he  had  for  claiming  au- 
thority over  them,  and  for  asserting  his  superiority  over  his 
opponents.  Yet  so  repugnant  was  this  task  to  his  feelings, 
tliat  he  not  only  humbly  apologizes  for  thus  speaking  of  him- 
self, but  he  finds  it  difiicult  to  do  what  he  felt  must  be  done. 
He  over  and  over  begins  what  he  calls  his  boasting,  and  im- 
mediately turns  aside  to  something  else.  He  begs  them  to 
T)ear  with  him  while  he  proceeds  to  praise  himself,  v.  1,  for 
h.is  doing  so  sprang  from  the  purest  motive,  love  for  them  and 
anxiety  for  their  welfare,  vs.  2.  3.  An  anxiety  justified  by 
the  readiness  with  which  they  bore  with  those  who  preached 
another  gospel,  v.  4.  He  thus  spoke  because  he  was  on  a  par 
with  the  chief  apostles,  and  not  behind  those  who  among 
them  claimed  to  be  his  superiors,  v.  5.  They  might  have 
higher  pretensions  as  orators,  but  in  knowledge  and  in  every 
thing  that  really  pertained  to  the  apostolic  ofiice  he  was 
abundantly  manifest  among  them,  v.  6.  His  refusal  to  avail 
himself  of  his  right  to  be  supported  by  those  to  whom  he 
preached  was  no  ofifence  to  them,  and  no  renunciation  of  his 


260  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  1.2. 

apostleship,  vs.  7-9.  He  was  determined  to  refuse  any  peca» 
niary  aid  from  the  Christians  in  Achaia,  not  because  he  did 
not  love  them,  hut  because  he  wished  to  cut  off  all  occasion 
to  question  his  sincerity  from  those  who  sought  such  occasion, 
and  because  lie  desired  to  put  the  false  teachers  to  the  same 
test  of  disinterestedness,  vs.  10-12.  These  teachers  claimed 
to  be  apostles,  though  they  had  no  more  right  to  the  oiEce, 
than  Satan  had  to  be  regarded  as  an  angel  of  light,  vs.  13-15 

1.  Would  to  God  ye  could  bear  with  me  a  little  in 
(my)  folly  :  and  indeed  bear  with  me. 

The  self-commendation  of  the  false  teachers  was  the  fruit 
of  conceit  and  vanity  ;  with  the  apostle  it  was  self-vindication. 
Although  so  different  in  character  and  design,  they  had  one 
element  in  common.  Both  included  self-laudation.  Both, 
therefore,  are  designated  by  the  same  word,  boasting ;  and 
both,  therefore,  lie  calls  acfipoavvr]^  a  want  of  sense.  JVoidd  to 
God,  in  the  Greek  simply,  ocfteXov,  oh  that,  Iicotild.  In  fact, 
however,  every  such  exclamation  is,  in  the  pious  mind,  a 
prayer ;  and,  therefore,  the  rendering,  '  I  Avould  to  God,'  is 
neither  irreverent  nor  inaccurate.  Oh  that  ye  coidd  hear  icith 
Qne,  (di/e9(€o-.^e,  Hellenistic  'form,  instead  of  y]V€ix'^v^^')  The 
pronoun  ixov  properly  belongs  to  the  verb,  and  not  to  the  fol- 
lowing jxiKpov  Tt,  as  if  the  sense  were,  a  little  of  my  folly.  The 
meaning  is,  'Bear  with  me  {[xiKpov  n  d^poorvrr^s),  as  to  a  little 
of  folly?  This  reading  is,  on  the  authority  of  the  majori- 
ty of  MSS.,  adopted  by  the  later  editors.  Knapp  and  others 
read,  /xiKpov  t^  atfipoarvvr),  a  little  as  to  folly  /  which  amounts  to 
the  same  thing.  And  hideed  bear  ivith  me.  So  Calvin,  Beza, 
and  many  others,  who  take  auixio-Se  as  the  imperative.  This 
clause  is  then  a  repetition  of  the  first,  only  more  vehemently 
expressed  The  former  is  a  wish,  the  latter  a  supplication  or 
demand.  But  the  context  does  not  require  this  vehemence. 
A  more  appropriate  sense  is  afforded  by  taking  the  word  in 
the  indicative,  '  But  indeed  ye  do  bear  with  me ; '  i.  e.  the 
request  is  not  necessary,  I  know  you  are  disposed  to  suffer 
me  to  speak  as  I  see  lit. 

2.  For  I  am  jealous  over  you  with  godly  jealousy: 
for  I  have  espoused  you  to  one  husband,  that  I  may 
present  (you  as)  a  chaste  virgin  to  Christ. 


II.   CORINTHIANS    11,  2.  251 

Tliis  is  the  reason  either  why  thev  should  bear  with  him, 
or  why  he  was  assured  that  tliey  would  do  so.  That  is,  the 
connection  is  either  with  the  first  and  principal  clause  of  y.  1, 
or  with  the  latter  clause.  It  makes  but  little  difference.  The 
sense  is  better  if  the  connection  is  with  the  first  clause.  '  Bear 
with  my  folly — for  I  am  jealous  over  you.'  Zy]Xoi  yap  vjjms. 
The  word  ^t/Aow  may  mean,  I  ardently  love,  or  more  specifi- 
cally, I  am  jealous.  The  latter,  as  the  figure  of  marriage  is 
used,  is  probably  the  sense  in  which  the  apostle  uses  the  word. 
W-ith  godly  jealousy ;  ^rjX.o<s  ^eov  may  mean  a  zeal  of  which 
God  is  the  object,  as  in  Rom.  10,  2;  comp.  John  2,  17.  In 
that  case  Paul  intends  to  say  that  the  feeling  which  he  had 
for  the  Corinthians  was  a  pious  feeling.  It  was  no  selfish  or 
mercenary  interest,  but  such  as  arose  from  his  desire  to  pro- 
mote the  honour  of  God.  Or,  the  meaning  is,  a  zeal  of  which 
God  is  the  author;  or,  a  zeal  which  God  approves;  or,  the 
zeal  which  God  has.  As  the  people  of  God  are  so  ol'ten  rep- 
resented in  the  Bible  as  standing  to  God  in  a  relation  analo- 
gous to  that  of  a  wife  to  a  husband,  so  God  is  represented  as 
being  jealous,  i.  e.  moved  to  deep  dis])leasure  when  they  trans- 
fer their  love  to  another  object.  Is.  54,  5.  62,  5.  Ez.  16. 
Hos.  2.  In  this  view,  the  apostle  means  to  say,  that  he  shai-es 
in  the  feehng  which  God  is  represented  as  entertaining 
towards  his  church.  The  translation  given  in  the  English 
version  includes  all  the  meanings  above  mentioned ;  for  a 
godly  jealousy  (or  zeal)  is  a  pious  zeal,  it  is  a  zeal  of  Avhich 
God  is  both  the  object  and  the  author,  and  it  is  such  a  zeal  as 
he  has.  J^or  J  have  esjxmsed  you  to  one  husband.  It  was 
natural  for  the  apostle  to  feel  this  jealousy  over  them, /or  he 
stood  in  a  most  intimate  relation  to  them.  Their  union  with 
Christ  was  his  work.  1  Cor.  4,  15.  9,  1.  He  may  compare 
himself  in  this  verse  to  a  father  who  gives  his  daughter  to 
the  bridegroom.  To  this  it  is  objected  that  Paul  became  the 
father  of  the  Corinthians  by  their  conversion ;  whereas  the 
relation  here  referred  to  subsisted  before  their  conversion  or 
espousal  to  Christ.  It  is  commonly  assumed  that  the  allusion 
is  to  the  office  of  "the  friend  of  the  bridegroom,"  John  3,  29, 
(:rapaj/i'/xf/)tos,)  whose  business  it  was  to  select  the  bride,  to  be 
responsible  for  her  conduct,  and  to  present  her  to  the  bride- 
groom. In  this  sense  Moses  was  called  7rapavv/x(pio<;  by  the 
Rabbis,  as  it  was  through  him  the  peoi^Je  entered  into  cove- 
nant with  God.  In  either  way  the  sense  is  the  same.  Paul's 
relation  was  so  intimate  with  the  Corinthians  as  the  author  of 


252  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  3. 

their  espousals  to  Christ,  that  he  could  not  fail  to  feel  the 
deepest  interest  in  their  fidelity.  I  have  espoused  you.  The 
verb  apfxo^o)  in  the  active  voice  is  used  of  the  father  who  be- 
troths  his  daughter ;  in  the  passive  of  the  bride  who  is  be- 
trothed ;  in  the  middle  voice  it  is  generally  used  of  the  man 
who  j^ledges  himself  to  a  Avoman.  The  middle  form,  however, 
is  sometimes  used,  as  in  this  verse,  (rjpfxoadfxrjv^)  in  the  active 
sense.  To  one  hushcuid.  The  marriage  relation  from  its  na^ 
tare  is  exclusive.  It  can  be  sustained  only  to  one  man.  So 
the  relation  of  the  church,  or  of  the  believer,  to  Christ  is  in 
like  manner  exclusive.  We  can  have  but  one  God  and  Sa- 
viour. Love  to  him  of  necessity  excludes  all  love  of  the  same 
kind  to  every  other  being.  Hence  the  apostle  says  he  had 
espoused  (betrothed)  them  to  one  man.  This  was  done  in 
order,  in  due  time,  to  present  them  as  a  chaste  virgbi  unto 
Christ.  As  in  Eph.  5,  27,  this  presentation  of  the  church  to 
Christ  as  his  bride,  is  said  to  take  place  at  his  second  coming, 
this  passage  is  commonly  understood  to  refer  to  that  event. 
Paul's  desire  w^as  that  the  Corinthians  should  remain  faithful 
to  their  vows,  so  as  to  be  presented  to  Christ  a  glorious 
church,  without  spot  or  wrinkle,  on  that  great  day.  He 
dreaded  lest  they  should,  in  that  day,  be  rejected  and  con- 
temned as  a  woman  unfaithful  to  her  vows. 

3.  But  I  fear,  lest  by  any  means,  as  the  serpent 
beguiled  Eve  through  his  subtilty,  so  your  minds 
should  be  corrupted  from  the  simplicity  that  is  in 
Christ. 

The  apostle  adheres  to  his  figure.  Though  they  were  be- 
trothed to  Christ,  he  feared  that  their  affections  might  be  se- 
duced from  him  and  fixed  on  some  other  object.  Men  are 
not  jealous  until  their  apprehensions  are  excited.  They  must 
liave  some  reason,  either  real  or  imaginary,  for  suspecting  the 
fidelity  of  those  they  love.  The  ground  of  the  apostle's  jeal- 
ousy was  his  fear.  He  feared  (/xr/Troos)  lest  per admnture.  They 
had  not  yet  turned  aside,  but  there  was  great  danger  that  they 
might  yield  to  the  seductions  to  wliich  they  were  exposed. 
There  was  one  standing  example  and  warning  both  of  tlie  in- 
constancy of  the  human  heart,  and  of  the  fearful  consequences 
of  forsaking  God.  Eve  was  created  holy,  she  stood  in  p.'iradise 
in  the  perfection  of  her  nature,  with  every  conceivable  motive 


II.    CORINTHIANS    11,  4.  253 

to  secure  her  fidelity.  Yet  by  the  subtilty  of  Satan  she  fell 
What  reason  then  have  we  to  fear  who  are  exposed  to  the 
machinations  of  the  same  great  seducer.  As  the  ser]?ent  he- 
gulled  Eve  ;  i.  e.  Satan  in  the  form  of  a  serpent.  Tlie  serpent, 
i.  e.  the  well-known  serpent  of  which  Moses  speaks.  The 
New  Testament  writers  thus  assume,  and  thereby  sanction, 
the  historical  verity  of  the  Old  Testament  record.  The  ac- 
count of  the  temptation  as  recorded  in  Genesis  is  regarded  by 
the  inspired  writers  of  the  New  Testament  not  as  a  myth,  or 
as  an  allegory,  but  as  a  true  history.  Comp.  1  Tim.  2,  14. 
Rev.  12,  9.  15.  Beguiled^  i^-qTrdrrjaev,  thoroughly/  deceived. 
All  seduction  is  by  means  of  deception.  Sin  is  in  its  nature 
deceit.  The  imagination  is  filled  with  false  images,  and  the 
foolish  heart  is  darkened.  Eve  was  thus  deceived  by  the  sub- 
tilty of  Satan.  She  wiis  made  to  disbelieve  what  was  true,  and 
to  believe  what  was  false.  Man's  belief,  in  a  very  large  sphere, 
IS  determined  by  his  feelings.  The  heart  controls  the  under- 
standing. The  good  believe  the  true;  the  evil  believe  the 
untrue.  This  is  the  reason  why  men  are  accountable  for  their 
faith,  and  why  the  wicked  are  led  captive  by  Satan  into  all 
manuer  of  error.  Eve  was  deceived  by  exciting  unholy  feel- 
ings in  her  heart.  Paul's  apprehension  was  lest  the  Corinthi- 
ans, surrounded  by  false  teachers,  the  ministers  of  Satan, 
should  in  like  manner  be  beguiled.  What  he  feared  was  that 
their  9ni7ids  shoidd  he  corrupted.  It  was  a  moral  perversion, 
or  corruption,  that  he  apprehended.  Your  minds.,  rk  vo^/xara 
vixZ)v.  The  word  voTy/xa  means  first  thought ;  then  that  which 
thinks,  the  understanding ;  and  then,  the  affections  or  dispo- 
sitions. Phil.  4,  7.  Our  translation,  "  your  minds,"  as  includ- 
ing the  idea  both  of  thought  and  feeling,  is  the  most  appro- 
priate rendering.  Corrupted  from.,  is  a  pregnant  expression, 
meaning  corrupted  so  as  to  be  turned  from.  The  simplicity 
that  is  ill  Christ  /  ctTro  t-»}s  aTrXoTT^ros  T-^s  ets  Tov  Xptcrrdv,  '  from 
singleness  of  mind  towards  Christ.'  That  is,  the  undivided 
affection  and  devotion  to  Christ  which  is  due  from  a  bride  to 
her  spouse.  The  allusion  to  the  marriage  relation  is  kept  up. 
Paul  had  compared  the  Corinthians  to  a  virgin  espoused  to 
one  man,  and  he  feared  lest  their  aflections  might  be  seduced 
from  Christ  and  transferred  to  another. 

4.  For  if  he  that  cometh  preacheth  another  Jesus, 
whom  we  have  not  preached,  or  (if)  ye  receive  another 


254  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  4. 

spirit,  which  ye  have  not  received,  or  another  gospel, 
which  ye  have  not  accepted,  ye  might  we\\  bear  with 
(him). 

There  are  two  entirely  different  views  of  the  meaning  of 
this  verse,  depending  on  the  view  taken  of  the  connection. 
If  the  association  of  ideas  is  with  the  preceding  verse,  so  that 
this  passage  assigns  the  reason  of  the  fear  there  expressed, 
the  meaning  is,  'I  am  afraid  concerning  you,  for  if  a  false 
teacher  comes  and  preaches  another  gospel,  you  readily  bear 
with  him.'  It  is  a  reproof  of  their  credulity  and  easiness  of 
persuasion  to  forsake  the  truth,  analogous  to  that  administered 
to  the  Galatians.  Gal.  4,  6-8.  5,  8.  But  if  this  verse  is  con- 
nected with  the  main  subject  as  presented  in  v.  1,  then  the 
sense  is,  '  Bear  with  me,  for  if  a  false  teacher  preaches  another 
gospel  you  bear  with  him.'  This  is  to  be  preferred,  not  only 
because  the  sense  is  better  as  more  consistent  with  the  con- 
text, but  also  because  av^x'^ixai  means  to  endure^  to  put  up  with^ 
and  supposes  that  the  thing  endured  is  in  itself  repulsive.  In 
this  sense  the  word  is  used  twice  in  v.  1,  and  should  be  so 
taken  here.  '  If  a  man  preaches  a  new  Christ  ye  would  put 
up  with  his  self-laudation,  therefore,  you  should  put  uj^  with 
mine.'  The  proper  force  of  the  verb  {avix^iJ^'^')  is  also  against 
the  interpretation  given  by  Chrysostom  and  followed  by  many 
later  commentators.  'If  any  one  really  preached  another 
gospel  (i.  e.  communicated  to  you  another  method  of  salva- 
tion), you  would  do  well  to  bear  with  him  and  receive  him 
gladly.'  But  all  this  is  foreign  to  the  context.  The  thing  to 
be  endured,  was  something  hard  to  put  up  with.  It  was  what 
the  apostle  calls  folly. 

For  if  he  that  cometh^  6  ipxofxcvo^,  the  corner^  any  one  who 
happens  to  come.  The  reference  is  not  to  any  one  well  known 
false  teacher,  but  to  a  whole  class.  Preaches  another  Jesus  ; 
not  another  Saviour,  but  another  person  than  the  son  of  Mary 
whom  we  preached.  That  is,  if  he  sets  forth  some  other  in- 
dividual as  the  true  deliverer  from  sin.  Or  if  ye  receive  an- 
other spirit,  which  ye  have  not  received.  The  gift  of  the  Holy 
Gliost  was  secured  by  the  work  of  Christ.  He  redeemed  us 
from  the  curse  of  the  law — in  order  that  we  might  receive  the 
promise  of  the  Spirit.  Gal.  3,  13.  14.  The  indwelling  of  the 
Spirit,  therefore,  as  manifested  by  his  sanctifying  and  miracu- 
lous power,  was  the  great  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel 
Uenoe  the  apostle,  to  convince  the  Galatians  of  the  folly  of 


II.    CORINTHIANS    11,  5.  255 

apostasy  to  Judaism,  says,  "This  only  would  I  learn  of  you 
Received  ye  the  Spirit  iDy  the  works  of  the  law,  or  by  the 
hearing  of  faith?"  Gal.  3,  2  ;  and  in  Heb.  2,  4,  he  says,  God 
bore  witness  to  the  gospel  by  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
The  apostle  here  supposes  the  impossible  case  that  a  like  con- 
firmation had  attended  the  preaching  of  the  false  teachei*s. 
'  Ii"'  he  says,  '  they  preach  another  (aAXo;)  Jesus,  and  in  proof 
that  he  is  truly  a  Saviour,  ye  receive  a  different  (hepos)  spirit, 
i.  e.  a  spirit  whose  manifestations  were  of  a  different  kind 
from  those  of  the  Spirit  who  attests  my  preaching,'  &g.  Or 
another  (hipo^,  a  different)  gospel,  which  ye  have  7iot  accepted. 
In  the  former  clause  the  verb  is  iXd/Scre  (ye  received),  in  the 
latter  iSi^aaSe  (ye  accepted),  because,  as  Bengel  says,  Non 
concurrit  voluntas  hominis  in  accipiendo  Spiritu,  ut  in  recipi- 
endo  evangelio.  That  is,  man  is  passive  in  receiving  the 
spirit,  and  active  in  accepting  the  gospel.  Te  might  icell 
hear  with  him.  The  word  is  avdx^o-^^^  in  the  imperfect.  The 
tense  which  the  context  Avould  seem  to  demand  is  the  present, 
dvcx€a-^9e,  a  reading  which  Lachmann  and  Riickert,  on  the  au- 
thority of  the  MS.  B,  have  introduced  into  the  text.  The 
other  leading  verbs  of  the  verse  are  in  the  present,  '  If  one 
preaches  another  Jesus,  and  ye  receive  another  Spirit,  and 
accept  another  gospel,  (in  that  case,)  ye  do  bear  with  him.' 
Instead,  however,  of  saying, '  ye  do  bear  with  him,'  the  apostle 
is  supposed  purposely  to  soften  the  expression  by  saying,  '  ye 
might  well  bear  with  him;'  the  particle  av  being,  as  often, 
understood.  In  this  way  he  avoids  the  direct  charge  of  tol- 
erating the  conceited  boasting  of  the  false  teachers.  Others, 
as  Meyer  and  Winer,  assume  an  irregularity,  or  change  of 
construction. 

5.  Por  I  suppose  I  was  not  a  whit  behind  the  very 
chiefest  apostles. 

The  sense  here  again  depends  on  the  connection.  If  the 
yap  refers  to  v.  4,  the  reference  must  be  (as  so  often  occurs  in 
Paul's  writings)  to  a  thought  omitted.  'Ye  are  wrong  in 
thus  bearing  with  the  false  teachers,  for  I  am  equal  to  the 
chief  apostles.'  This,  however,  is  not  in  harmony  with  the 
context.  Paul's  design  is  not  so  much  to  reprove  the  Corin- 
thians for  tolerating  the  folly  of  the  false  teachers,  as  to  induce 
them  to  bear  with  his.  He  felt  it  to  be  necessary  to  vindicate 
himself,  and  he  therefore  prays  them  to  bear  with  him  a  little 


256  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  6. 

in  his  follj".  To  this  point  every  thing  here  refers.  They 
should  thus  bcfxr  with  him,  1.  Because  he  was  jealous  over 
them  with  a  godly  jealousy.  2.  Because  they  would  bear 
with  any  Avho  really  preached  another  gospel,  were  that  possi- 
ble. 3.  Because  he  was  on  a  par  with  the  chief  apostles. 
The  connection,  therefore,  is  not  with  v.  4,  but  with  the  main 
subject  as  presented  in  v.  1.  This  also  determines  the  ques- 
tion. Who  are  meant  by  the  chiefest  apostles  ?  If  the  con- 
nection is  with  v.  4,  then  the  expression  is  to  be  understood 
ironically  in  reference  to  the  false  teachers.  '  Ye  do  wrong 
to  tolerate  them,  for  I  am  in  no  respect  behind  those  superla- 
tive apostles.'  So  Beza,  Billroth,  Olshausen,  Meyer,  and  the 
majority  of  the  moderns.  The  reason  given  for  this  is,  that 
there  is  no  controversy  with  the  true  apostles  in  this  connec- 
tion, and  therefore  nothing  to  call  for  such  an  assertion  of  his 
equality  with  them  as  we  find  in  Gal.  2,  6-11.  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  force  in  this  reason  if  the  connection  is  with  v.  1. 
'  Bear  w^ith  me  in  my  boasting,  for  I  am  not  behind  the  chief- 
est apostles.'  In  this  view  the  reference  to  the  true  apostles 
is  pertinent  and  natural.  Paul  says,  fxrjSev  wrepr/KcVai,  that  as 
to  not/mig,  in  no  one  respect,  had  he  fallen  short,  or  was  he 
left  behind  by  the  chiefest  apostles ;  neither  in  gifts,  nor  in 
labours,  nor  in  success  had  any  one  of  them  been  more  highly 
favoured,  nor  more  clearly  authenticated  as  the  messenger  of 
Christ.  He  was  therefore  fully  entitled  to  all  the  deference 
and  obedience  which  were  due  to  the  chiefest  apostles.  The 
expression  rtuv  v-rrepXtav  aTToo-ToA-wi/,  is  not  in  itself  bitter  or 
ironical.  This  is  a  force  which  must  be  given  by  the  connec- 
tion ;  it  does  not  lie  in  the  words  themselves.  It  is  not  equi- 
valent to  the  iJ/evha~6aToX.oi  of  V.  13,  and  therefore  there  is  no 
more  reason  why  the  true  apostles  should  not  be  called  oi 
virepXiav  d7rdcrroA.ot  than  ol  SoKovi/res  elvac  tl  in  Gal.  2,  6.  The 
argument,  therefore,  which  the  Reformers  derived  from  this 
passage  against  the  primacy  of  Peter  is  perfectly  legitimate. 
Paul  was  Peter's  equal  in  every  respect,  and  so  far  from  being 
under  his  authority,  he  not  only  refused  to  follow  his  example 
but  reproved  him  to  bis  face.     Gal.  2,  11. 

6.  But  though  (I  be)  rude  in  speech,  yet  not  in 
knowledge ;  but  we  have  been  thoroughly  made  mani- 
[est  among  you  in  all  things. 

In  Corinth,  where  Grecian  culture  was  at  its  height,  it  had 


II.   COKINTHIAN-S    11,  6.  257 

been  urged  as  an  objection  to  Paul  that  he  did  not  speak  with 
the  wisdom  of  words.  1  Cor.  1,  17.  He  was  no  rhetorician, 
and  did  not  appear  in  the  character  of  an  orator.  I'his  he 
here,  as  in  the  former  epistle,  concedes.  If  that  were  an  ob- 
jection, he  had  no  answer  to  make  other  than  that  his  depend- 
ence was  on  the  demonstration  of  the  Spirit,  and  not  the  per- 
suasive words  of  man's  wisdom.  1  Cor.  2,  4.  Et  8e  Kai  is 
concessive.  '  But  if,  as  is  true,  I  am  rude  in  speech  ; '  iStcorr^s 
T(5  Aoyoj,  untrained,  or  unskilful  in  speech.  The  word  IScwr-qq 
means  a  private  person  as  opposed  to  those  in  official  station ; 
a  commoner  as  opposed  to  a  patrician;  an  uneducated,  or 
unskilful  man,  as  opposed  to  those  who  were  specially  trained 
for  any  service  or  work,  corporeal  or  mental.  What  Paul 
concedes  is  not  the  want  of  eloquence,  of  which  his  writings 
afford  abundant  evidence,  but  of  the  special  training  of  a 
Grecian.  He  spoke  Greek  as  a  Jew.  It  is  not  improbable 
that  some  of  his  opponents  in  Corinth,  although  themselves 
of  Hebrew  origin,  prided  themselves  on  their  skill  in  the  use 
of  the  Greek  language,  and  made  the  apostle's  deficiency  in 
that  respect  a  ground  of  disparagement,  ^ut  not  in  'knowl- 
edge. He  was  no  iStwri^s  tt^  yvcuo-et.  Having  been  taught  the 
gospel  by  immediate  revelation  from  Christ,  Gal.  2,  12,"he  had 
complete  possession  of  that  system  of  truth  which  it  v>'as  the 
object  of  the  apostleship  to  communicate  to  men.  He  there- 
fore everywhere  asserts  his  competency  as  a  teacher  instructed 
of  God  and  entitled  to  full  credence  and  implicit  confidence. 
1  Cor.  2,6-11.  Eph.  3,4.5.  But  ice  have  been  thoroughly 
made  manifest  among  you  in  all  things.  In  this  clause, 
after  ^avcpw^eVreg,  la-fxiv  is  to  be  su23plied ;  kv  TravTL,  rendered 
thoroughly,  is  in  every  point,  or  in  every  respect ;  iv  Trao-tv,  i?i 
all  things,  so  that  in  every  point  in  all  departments  he  was 
manifest,  i.  e.  clearly  known;  eh  vfxas,  as  it  concerns  you,  (not 
among  you,  which  would  require  iv  v/juv).  So  far  from  being 
deficient  in  knowledge,  he  stood  clearly  revealed  before  them 
as  thoroughly  furnished  in  every  respect  and  in  all  things  as 
an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ.  In  nothing  did  he  fall  behind  the 
very  chief  of  the  apostles.  Luther's  translation  of  this  clause 
is,  Doch  ich  bin  bei  euch  allenthalben  wohl  bekannt.  It  is  in 
this  view  a  correction  of  what  goes  before.  '  I  am  not  de- 
ficient in  knowledge.  Yet  I  am  in  all  respects  perfectly 
known  by  you;  there  is  no  need  to  tell  you  what  I  am.' 
Beza  and  Olshausen  give  the  same  explanation.  This,  how- 
ever, does  not  agree  with  what  follows  in  the  next  verse. 


258  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  7. 

Others  again,  understand  the  apostle  as  here  asserting  his 
well  established  character  for  purity  of  purpose  and  conduct. 
My  whole  conduct  is  perfectly  open  and  straightforward  for 
you  to  see.'  There  is,  however,  no  impeachment  of  his  con- 
duct referred  to  in  the  context,  and  therefore  no  call  for  this 
general  assertion  of  integrity.  It  is  better  to  restrict  the  pas- 
sage to  the  point  immediately  in  hand.  '  He  was  not  behind 
the  chief  apostles ;  but  although  rude  in  speech,  he  was  not 
deficient  in  knowledge,  and  was  manifest  before  them  in  all 
things,  i.  e.  in  all  things  pertaining  to  the  apostolic  office.' 
Instead  of  t^ai/epcu^evres  the  MSS.  B,  F,  G,  17,  read  <f>avepoj(rau 
re?,  which  Lachmann,  Riickert  and  Tischendorf  adopt.  This 
alters  the  whole  sense.  The  meaning  most  naturally  then  is, 
'  I  am  not  deficient  in  knowledge,  but  have  manifested  it  in 
every  point  in  all  things.'  The  majority  of  critical  editors  re- 
tain the  common  text,  w^hich  gives  a  sense  equally  well  suited 
to  the  connection. 


7.  Have  I  committed  an  oflPence  in  abasing  myself 
that  ye  might  be  exalted,  because  I  have  preached  to 
you  the  gospel  of  God  freely  ? 

Our  version  omits  the  particle  -^  (or),  which  is  necessary 
to  indicate  the  connection.  Paul  was  clearly  manifested  as 
an  apostle.  ''Or,^  he  asks,  'is  it  an  objection  to  my  apostle- 
sliip  that  I  have  not  availed  myself  of  the  right  of  an  apostle 
to  be  supported  by  those  to  whom  I  preach  ?  Have  I  sinned 
in  this  respect?'  Comp.  1  Cor.  9,4-15.  Have  I  committed 
an  offence  in  abasing  myself  j  i/xavrov  raTretvcov,  humbVmg  my- 
self by  renouncing  a  privilege  which  was  my  due.  Comp.  Phil. 
4,  12.  It  was  an  act  of  self-humiliation  that  Paul,  though  en- 
titled to  be  supported  by  the  people,  sustained  himself  in 
great  measure  by  the  labour  of  his  own  hands.  I  humbled 
myself,  he  says,  that  ye  might  he  exalted^  that  is,  for  your 
good.  It  was  to  promote  their  spiritual  interests  that  he 
wrought  at  the  trade  of  a  tent-maker.  JBecause  1 2^reaQhed 
luito  you  the  gospel  of  God  freely  f  This  clause,  beginning 
witli  oTi^  is  exegetical  of  the  preceding.  'Have  I  sinned  hum- 
bling myself,  i.  e.  have  I  sinned  because  I  preached  freely  ? ' 
(Sw^oeav,  gratuitously).  It  is  clearly  intimated  in  1  Cor.  9,  that 
Paul's  refusing  to  be  supported  by  the  Corinthians  was  repre- 
sented by  bis  enemies  as  arising  from  the  consciousness  of  the 


II.    CORINTHIAN^S   11,  8.  9.  259 

invalidity  of  his  claim  to  the  apostleship.  As  they  had  no 
other  objection  to  him,  he  asks  whether  they  were  disposed 
to  urge  that. 


8.  I  robbed  other  churches,  taking  wages  (of  them), 
to  do  you  service. 

To  rob  is  to  take  with  violence  what  does  not  belong  to 
us.  It  is  therefore  only  in  a  figurative  sense  the  word  is  here 
used.  What  Paul  received  from  other  (i.  e.  the  Macedonian) 
churches,  he  was  fully  entitled  to,  and  it  was  freely  given. 
The  only  point  of  comparison  or  analogy  was  that  he  took 
from  them  what  the  Corinthians  ought  to  have  contributed. 
Taking  loages  (Xa/Swv  oi/^wvtor),  or  a  stipend.  To  do  you  ser- 
vice., irpot;  TYjv  vfjLiov  SiaKovcav^  for  your  ministry.  This  expresses 
the  object  of  his  receiving  assistance  from  others.  It  was 
that  he  might  minister  gratuitously  to  them. 


9.  And  when  I  was  present  with  you,  and  wanted, 
I  was  chargeable  to  no  man  :  for  that  which  was  lack- 
ing to  me  the  brethren  which  came  from  Macedonia 
supplied :  and  in  all  (things)  I  have  kept  myself  from 
being  burdensome  unto  you,  and  (so)  will  I  keep 
(myself). 

It  is  plain  from  this  verse  that  when  Paul  went  to  Corinth, 
he  took  Avith  him  a  supply  of  money  derived  from  other 
churches,  which  he  supplemented  by  the  proceeds  of  his  own 
labour ;  and  when  his  stock  Avas  exhausted  the  deficiency  was 
supplied  by  the  brethren  from  Macedonia.  A7id  ichen  I  vms 
present  (irapajv  Trpos  ii/xas),  'being  present  with  you;'  {kox  vo-tc- 
p-qSiLs),  'and  being  reduced  to  want;'  (ov  KanvapK-rjaa  ovSevos), 
I  was  chargeable  to  no  man.,  literally,  'I  pressed  as  a  dead 
weight  upon  no  one,'  i.  e.  I  was  burdensome  to  no  one.  The 
verb  here  used  is  derived  from  vdpKrj^  torpor.,  hence  vapKaw,  to 
he  torpid.  The  compound  KaravapKaoi,  to  be  torpjid  against 
any  one,  (to  press  heavily  upon  him,)  is  found  only  here  and 
in  12,  13.  14.  In  confirmation  of  the  assertion  that  he  had 
been  chargeable  to  no  man  he  adds,  for  that  which  was  lack* 
ing  to  m,e  {ro  variprj/xd  /xov,  m,y  deficiency,)  the  brethren  which 


26G  II.   CORINTHIANS    11,  9, 

carrx  froin  3facedonia  (rather,  'the  brethren  having  come 
from  Macedonia,')  supplied ;  Trpoa-aveTrXr/pojcrav,  a  double  com- 
pound verb,  to  supply  in  addition.  The  contribution  of  the 
churches  were  added  to  what  Paul  earned  by  his  labour,  or, 
to  his  diminished  stock  which  he  had  brought  with  him  to 
Corinth.  The  point  on  which  he  here  dwells  is  not  that  he 
laboured  for  Ins  own  support,  but  that  he  received  assistance 
from  other  churches,  while  he  refused  to  receive  any  thing 
from  the  Corinthians.  His  conduct  in  reference  to  receiving 
aid  varied  with  circumstances.  From  some  churches  he  re- 
ceived it  without  hesitation ;  from  others  he  w^ould  not  receive 
it  at  all.  He  said  to  the  Ephesians,  "I  coveted  no  man's  sil- 
ver, or  gold,  or  apparel.  Yea,  ye  yourselves  know,  that  these 
hands  liave  ministered  unto  my  necessities,  and  to  them  that 
were  with  me,"  Acts  20,  34,  35.  So  also  to  the  Thessalonians 
he  said,  "  Ye  remember,  brethren,  our  labour  and  travail :  for 
labouring  night  and  day,  because  we  would  not  be  chargeable 
unto  any  of  you,  w^e  preached  unto  }  ou  the  gospel  of  God," 
1  Thess.  2,  9.  2  Thess.  3,  8.  Among  the  Corinthians  he  adopt- 
ed the  same  course.  Acts  18,  3.  1  Cor.  9,  15-18.  Whereas 
from  the  Philippians  he  received  repeated  contributions,  not 
only  Avhile  labouring  among  tliem,  but  as  he  reminds  them, 
"Even  in  Thessalonica  ye  sent  once  and  again  unto  my  neces- 
sity," Phil.  4,  16  ;  and  when  a  prisoner  in  Rome  they  sent  by 
the  hands  of  Epaphroditus  an  abundant  supply,  so  that  he 
said,  "I  have  all,  and  abound,"  Phil.  4,  18.  It  was  therefore 
from  no  unwillingness  to  receive  what  he  knew  to  be  due  by 
the  ordinance  of  Christ,  (viz.,  an  adequate  support,)  1  Cor.  9, 
14,  but  simply,  as  ho  says,  to  cut  off  occasion  from  those  who 
.sought  occasion.  He  was  unwilling  that  his  enemies  should 
have  the  opportunity  of  imputing  to  him  any  mercenary  mo- 
tive in  preaching  the  gospel.  This  was  specially  necessary  in 
Corinth,  and  therefore  the  apostle  says,  '  In  all  things  {Iv  itavri^ 
in  every  thing,  not  only  in  pecuniary  matters,  but  in  every 
thing  else,)  I  have  kept  myself  from  being  buidensome  unto 
you,  and  will  keep  myself.'  He  would  receive  no  obligation 
at  their  hands.  He  was  determined  to  assume  towards  them 
a  position  of  entire  independence.  This  Mas  doubtless  vei-y 
l)ainful  to  the  faithful  in  Corinth.  They  could  not  but  regard 
it  as  a  proof  either  of  the  want  of  love  or  of  the  want  of  con- 
fidence on  his  part.  Still  his  determination  as  to  this  point 
was  settled,  and  he  therefore  adds  solemnly  in  the  next 
verse  ; 


II.   CORIXTHIAXS    11-   10-12.  261 

10.  As  the  truth  of  Christ  is  in  me,  no  man  shall 
stop  me  of  this  boasting  in  the  regions  of  Achaia. 

Calvin,  Beza,  and  others,  understand  this  as  an  oath,  or 
asseveration.  Our  translators  adopted  the  same  view,  and 
therefore  supply  the  word  as,  which  is  not  in  the  Greek. 
This  interpretation  is  not  required  by  the  text  or  context. 
The  words  are  simply,  'The  truth  (aA7;>^cta,  the  veracity, 
truthfulness)  of  Christ,  (i.  e.  the  veracity  which  pertains  to 
Christ,  and  which  Christ  produces,)  is  in  me.'  That  is,  in  vir- 
tue of  the  veracity  which  Christ  has  produced  in  me,  I  declare, 
that  {pn^  which  our  translators  omit,)  no  man  shall  stop  me  of 
this  boasting.  Literally,  '  This  boasting  shall  not  be  stopped 
as  to  me.'  The  word  is  (f>payri(rerai,  which  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  only  used  in  reference  to  the  mouth.  Rom.  3,  19. 
Heb.  11,  33.  'This  boasting  as  to  me  shall  not  have  its 
mouth  stopped.'  In  all  the  regiojis  of  Achaia  ;  not  in  Cor- 
inth only,  but  in  all  that  part  of  Greece  not  included  in  Mace- 
donia. From  the  Macedonians  he  was  willing  to  receive  aid  ; 
from  the  Christians  of  Achaia  he  would  not.  The  reason  for 
this  distinction  he  states  negatively  and  affirmatively  in  the 
following  verses. 

11.  12.  Wherefore?  because  I  love  you  not?  God 
knoweth.  But  what  1  do,  that  I  will  do,  that  I  may 
cut  off  occasion  from  them  which  desire  occasion  ;  that 
wherein  they  glory,  they  may  be  found  even  as  we. 

That  his  purpose  not  to  receive  aid  from  the  Corinthians 
did  not,  as  it  might  seem,  arise  from  Avant  of  love  to  them  he 
solemnly  declares.  The  expression  "  God  knows  "  in  the  lips 
of  the  apostle,  it  need  not  be  remarked,  implies  no  irreverence. 
It  is  a  pious  recognition  of  the  omniscience  of  God,  the  search- 
er of  all  hearts,  to  whom  he  appeals  as  the  witness  of  the 
strength  of  his  affection  for  his  people.  The  true  reason  Ibr 
his  determination  to  continue  to  do  as  he  had  already  done, 
was,  as  he  says.  That  I  may  cut  off  occasion  from  them  that 
d€sire  occasioii.  That  is,  that  I  may  avoid  giving  those  Vv'h::> 
desire  to  impeach  my  motives  any  pretence  for  the  charge 
that  I  preach  the  gospel  for  the  sake  of  gain.  It  is  plain  from 
1  Cor.  9,  15-18,  that  this  was  his  motive  in  refusing  to  receive 


262  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  11.  12. 

nicl  from  the  Corinthians ;  and  that  his  special  Kavxqixa^  oi 
ground  of  boasting,  was  that  he  preached  the  gospel  gratui 
toiisly.  He  said  he  would  rather  die  than  that  any  man  should 
take  from  him  that  ground  of  confidence.  This  of  course  im 
}  lies  that  the  purity  of  his  motives  had  been  assailed,  and  that 
his  object  in  making  "the  gospel  of  Christ  w^ithout  charge" 
was  to  .stop  the  mouths  of  his  accusers.  That  loherein  they 
glory.  This  clause  (with  tm)  depends  on  the  immediately 
preceding  one.  He  desired  to  cut  oft'  occasion  from  those 
Becking  it,  in  order  that,  if  they  chose  to  boast,  they  may  he 
found  even  as  we.  That  is,  he  wished  to  force  them  to  be  as 
disinterested  as  he  was.  According  to  this  interpretation,  Iv 
w,  in  the  phrase  kv  w  Kavyjovrai^  does  not  refer  to  any  special 
ground  of  boasting,  but  to  the  general  disposition.  '  Inas- 
much as  they  are  so  fond  of  boasting  and  of  setting  themselves 
up  as  apostles,  they  may  be  forced  to  give  over  making  gain 
of  the  gospel.' 

Calvin,  Grotius,  Riickert,  and  others,  assume  that  the  false 
teachers  in  Corinth  preached  gratuitously,  and  that  the  reason 
why  the  apostle  did  the  same,  was  that  he  might  not  give 
them  occasion  to  glory  over  him.  In  this  view  the  second 
clause  with  Iva  is  co-ordinate  vv^ith  the  first,  and  kv  w  in  the  last 
clause  refers  to  their  special  ground  of  boasting,  and  the  sense 
of  the  whole  is,  '  I  will  do  as  I  have  done  in  order  that  these 
false  teachers  shall  have  no  occasion  to  exalt  themselves  over 
me ;  that  is,  in  order  that  they  be  found,  when  they  boast  of 
their  disinterestedness,  to  be  no  better  than  I  am.'  But  to 
this  it  may  be  objected,  1.  That  it  is  evident  from  v.  20  of 
this  chapter,  and  from  the  whole  character  of  these  false 
teachers  as  depicted  by  the  apostle,  that  so  far  from  preach- 
ing gratuitously,  they  robbed  the  churches.  2.  It  is  clear 
from  what  is  said  in  the  former  epistle  that  Paul's  object  was 
not  to  prevent  his  opponents  setting  themselves  forth  as  his 
superiors,  but  to  make  undeniably  manifest  the  purity  of  his 
own  motives  in  preaching  the  gospel.  Others  again,  admit- 
ting that  the  false  teachers  received  money  from  the  Corinthi- 
ans, understand  the  apostle  to  say,  that  he  refused  aid  in 
order  that  he  might  take  away  from  the  false  teachers  all 
occasion  for  boasting  that  they  were  as  he  was.  This,  liow- 
ever,  was  not  their  boast.  They  did  not  claim  to  be  w^hat 
the  apostle  was,  for  they  denounced  him  as  an  impostor.  The 
Qrst  inter^jretation  suits  both  the  words  and  the  context. 


II.   CORINTHIANS    11,  13.  263 

13.  Por  such  (are)  false  apostles,  deceitful  workers, 
transforming  themselves  into  the  apostles  of  Christ. 

The  reason  assigned  in  this  verse  for  the  determination 
expressed  in  the  preceding,  to  cut  off  occasion  from  those  who 
sought  to  degrade  the  apostle,  is,  the  unworthy  character  of 
his  opponents.  They  were  so  unprincipled  and  unscrupulous 
tliat  Paul  was  determined  they  should  have  no  advantage  over 
him.  The  words  ol  tolovtol  KJ/evSaTroaroXoL  may  be  rendered 
either.  Such  false  apostles  are,  &c.,  or,  Such  are  false  apostles. 
The  Vulgate,  Luther,  Calvin,  and  the  majority  of  the  earlier 
commentators,  give  the  former  interpretation ;  most  of  the 
later  writers  the  latter.  The  latter  is  to  be  preferred  because 
the  emphasis  is  on  the  ^yord  false  ajyostles  ;  and  because  such 
false  apostles  would  imply  that  there  were  other  false  apostles 
who  w^ere  not  deceitful  workers.  False  apostles  are  those 
who  falsely  claimed  to  be  apostles,  as  false  Christs,  Matt.  24, 
24,  and  lalse  prophets.  Matt.  11, 15,  are  those  who  falsely 
claimed  to  be  Christ  or  prophets.  An  apostle  w^as  oomrais- 
sioned  by  Christ,  endowed  with  the  gifts  of  plenary  inspiration 
and  knowledge,  and  invested  with  supernatural  powers. 
Those  in  that  age,  and  those  who  now  claim  to  be  apostles 
without  this  commission,  these  gifts,  and  these  signs  of  the 
apostleship,  are  false  apostles.  They  claim  to  be  what  they 
are  not,  and  usurp  an  authority  which  does  not  belong  to 
them.  The  fundamental  idea  of  Romanism  is  the  perpetuity 
of  the  apostolic  office.  Bishops  are  assumed  to  be  apostles, 
and  therefore  claim  infallibility  in  teaching,  and  supreme  au- 
thority in  ruling.  If  we  admit  them  to  be  apostles,  we  must 
admit  the  validity  of  their  claims  to  unquestioning  faith  and 
obedience.  Deceitful  workers,  i.  e.  workers  who  use  deceit. 
They  were  workers  in  so  far  as  they  were  preachers  or  teach- 
ers ;  but  they  were  not  honest ;  they  availed  themselves  of 
every  means  to  deceive  and  pervert  the  people.  To  the  same 
persons  the  apostle  refers  in  Phil.  3,  2,  "as  evil  workers." 
Transforming  themselves  into,  i.  e.  assuming  the  character  of, 
the  apostles  of  Christ.  Though  their  real  object  was  not  to 
advance  the  kingdom  and  glory  of  Christ,  and  although  they 
were  never  commissioned  for  that  work,  they  gave  themselves 
out  as  Christ's  messengers  and  servants,  and  even  claimed  to 
have  a  more  intimate  relation  to  him,  and  to  be  more  devoted 
to  his  service  than  Paul  himself. 
12 


264  II.   CORIKTIIIANS    11,  14.  15. 

14.  And  no  marvel;  for  Satan  liimsclf  is  trans- 
formed into  an  angel  of  light. 

It  is  not  wonderful  that  false  apostles  should  put  them- 
selves forward  under  the  guise  of  apostles  of  Christ,  and  ap- 
pear and  be  received  as  such,  for  Satan  himself,  the  most  evil 
of  all  beings,  assumes  the  form  of  the  highest  and  purest  of 
created  intelligences.  A?i  angel  of  lights  i.  e.  a  bright,  pure, 
hap])y  angel.  Light  is  always  the  symbol  of  excellence  and 
blessedness,  hence  the  expressions  kingdom  of  light,  children 
of  light,  &c.  And  hence  God  is  said  to  dwell  in  light,  and 
the  saints  are  said  to  have  their  inheritance  in  light.  It  is  by 
no  means  clear  that  the  apostle  refers  either  to  the  history  of 
the  fall  or  to  Satan's  appearing  with  the  sons  of  God  as  men- 
tioned  in  Job  1,  6.  It  is  more  probable  that  the  statement 
rests  on  the  general  doctrine  of  the  Bible  concerning  the 
great  adversary.  He  is  everywhere  represented  as  the  de- 
ceiver, assuming  false  guises,  and  making  false  represen- 
tations. 


15.  Therefore  (it  is)  no  great  thing  if  his  ministers 
also  be  transformed  as  the  ministers  of  righteousness ; 
whose  end  shall  be  according  to  their  works. 

If  Satan  can  be  thus  changed,  it  is  no  great  thing  if  hia 
ministers  undergo  a  similar  transformation.  If  a  bad  angel 
can  assume  the  appearance  of  a  good  angel,  a  bad  man  may 
put  on  the  semblance  of  a  good  man.  The  false  teachers  are 
called  ministers  of  Satcin^  that  is,  they  are  his  servants,  1.  In 
so  far  as  they  are  instigated  and  controlled  in  their  labours  by 
him.  2.  And  in  so  far  that  their  labours  tend  to  advance  hig 
kingdom,  i.  e.  error  and  evil.  All  wicked  men  and  all  teach- 
ers of  false  doctrine  are,  in  this  sense  the  servants  of  Satan. 
He  is  their  master.  The  false  teachers  assumed  to  be  minis- 
ters of  righteousness.  This  may  mean,  righteous,  upright 
ministers ;  or,  promoters  of  righteousness  in  the  sense  of  gen- 
eral excellence.  They  pretended  to  be  the  promoters  of  all 
tliat  is  good.  Or,  righteousness  may  be  taken  in  its  peculiar 
New  Testament  and  Pauline  sense,  as  in  8,  9,  where  the 
the  phrase  "  ministry  of  righteousness  "  occurs ;  see  also  Eph. 
6,  15.  In  these  and  many  other  places  the  word  righteous- 
ness refers  to  "the  righteousness  of  God,"  or,  as  it  is  also 


II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  16.  265 

called  "the  righteousness  of  faith."  These  false  teachers 
professed  to  be  the  preachers  of  that  righteousness  which  is 
of  God  and  which  avails  to  the  justification  of  sinners  in  hia 
sight.  Satan  does  not  come  to  us  as  Satan ;  neither  does  sin 
present  itself  as  sin,  but  in  the  guise  of  virtue ;  and  the  teach- 
ers  of  error  set  themselves  forth  as  the  special  advocates  of 
truth.  Whose  end  shall  he  according  to  their  work?,  Satan 
is  none  the  less  Satan  when  he  appears  as  an  angel  cf  light, 
and  evil  is  evil  when  called  by  the  name  of  good.  God's 
judgments  are  according  to  the  truth.  He  does  not  pass 
sentence  on  the  {(T^ixa)  the  external  fashion  which  we  assume, 
but  on  our  real  character ;  not  on  the  mask,  but  on  the  man. 
The  end,  i.  e.  the  recompense  of  every  man,  shall  be  not  ac- 
cording to  his  professions,  not  according  to  his  own  convic- 
tions or  judgment  of  his  character  or  conduct,  not  according 
to  appearances  or  the  estimate  of  men,  but  according  to  his 
works.  If  men  really  promote  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  they 
will  be  regarded  and  treated  as  his  servants ;  if  they  increase 
the  dominion  of  sin  and  error,  they  will  be  regarded  and 
treated  as  the  ministers  of  Satan. 

16.  I  say  again,  Let  no  man  think  me  a  fool;  if 
otherwise,  yet  as  a  fool  receive  me,  that  I  may  boast 
myself  a  little. 

After  the  foregoing  outburst  of  feeling  against  the  false 
teachers,  the  apostle  resumes  his  purpose  of  self-vindication. 
He  therefore  says  again  what  he  had  in  substance  said  in  v.  1. 
Let  no  man  think  me  afool^  that  is,  a  boaster.  Self-laudation 
is  folly ;  and  self-vindication,  when  it  involves  the ,  necessity 
of  self-praise,  has  the  appearance  of  folly.  Therefore  the 
apostle  was  pained  and  humbled  by  being  obliged  to  praise 
himself.  He  was  no  boaster,  and  no  one  could  rightfully  so 
regard  him,  hut  if  otherwise  {d  Se  yu-ryye,  the  negative  is  used 
because  although  the  preceding  clause  is  negative,  the  idea 
is,  '  I  would  that  no  man  should  regard  me  as  a  fool,  but  if 
you  do  not  think  of  me  as  I  ^s'ould  wish,  still,  &c*)  Meceive 
me^  (i.  e.  bear  with  me,)  that  I  may  hoast  tnyself  a  little. 
The  words  are  Kdyw,  I  also,  i.  e.  I  as  well  as  others.  'You 
allow  my  enemies  to  boast  of  what  they  do,  permit  me  to  say 
a  little  of  what  I  have  done  and  suffered.' 

17.  That  which  I  speak,  I  speak  (it)  not  after  the 


266  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  17 

Lord,  but  as  it  were  foolishly,  in  this  confidence  of 
boasting. 

That  lohich  I speaJc,  o  AaXa>.  The  apostle  uses  Xa\<h  and 
not  Aeyw,  because  the  reference  is  not  to  any  definite  words 
which  he  had  uttered,  but  general — my  talk,  or  languasjo. 
Is  not  after  the  Lord,  i.  e.  is  not  such  as  characterized  Christ, 
or  becomes  his  disciples.  Our  Lord  was  no  boaster,  and  his 
Spirit  does  not  lead  any  one  to  boast.  This  is  very  common- 
ly regarded  as  a  denial  of  inspiration,  or  divine  guidance  in 
these  utterances.  Even  Bengel  says,  "  Whatever  Paul  wrote 
without  this  express  exception,  was  inspired  and  spoken  after 
the  Lord : "  and  Meyer  says,  ov  Xakd  Kara  Kvptov,  negirt  aller- 
dings  den  theopneusten  Charakter  der  Rede.  This  arises 
from  a  misconception  of  the  nature  and  design  of  inspiration. 
The  simple  end  of  inspiration  is  to  secure  infallibility  in  the 
communication  of  truth.  It  is  not  designed  to  sanctify ;  it 
does  not  preclude  the  natural  play  of  the  intellect  or  of  the 
feelings.  When  Paul  called  the  High  Priest  a  "  whited  wall," 
Acts  23,  3,  although  he  apologized  for  it,  he  was  as  much  in- 
sjHred  as  when  he  wrote  his  epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  Even 
supposing  therefore  that  there  was  something  of  human  weak- 
ness in  his  boasting,  that  would  not  prove  that  he  was  not 
under  the  inspiration  of  God  in  saying  that  he  boasted,  or  in 
sajang  that  boasting  was  folly.  But  this  assumption  is  un- 
necessary. There  was  nothing  wrong  in  his  selt-laudation. 
He  never  appears  more  truly  humble  than  when  these  refer- 
ences to  his  labour  and  sufferings  were  wrung  from  him,  filling 
him  with  a  feeling  of  self-contempt.  Alas !  how  few  of  the 
holiest  of  men  does  it  pain  and  mortify  to  speak  of  their  own 
greatness  or  success.  How  often  are  the  writings  even  of 
good  men  coals  on  which  they  sprinkle  incense  to  their  own 
pride.  When  Paul  said  that  his  boasting  was  not  after  the 
Lord,  he  said  no  more  than  when  he  called  it  folly.  AH  that 
the  expression  implies  is  that  self-praise  in  itself  considered,  is 
not  the  work  of  a  Christian ;  it  is  not  a  work  to  Avliich  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  impels  the  believer.  But,  Avlien  it  is  necessa- 
ry to  the  vindication  of  the  truth  or  the  lionor  of  religion,  it 
becomes  a  duty.  Mut  as  it  were  foolishly,  (eV  acftpoavvrj,  in 
folly.)  That  is,  speaking  boastfully  was  not  religious  but 
tbolisii.  Jn  this  confidence  of  boasting,  Iv  TavTy  rrj  viroa-TdaeL 
r^s  Kavxy]o-eio<s.  'Y7roaTdaL<s  may  mean  matter,  or  confidence. 
*  In  this  particular  matter,  or  case  of  boasting.'     In  this  sense 


II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  18.  267 

it  is  a  limitation  of  what  precedes.  He  was  justified  in  boast- 
ing in  this  particular  matter.  It  is,  however,  more  consistent 
with  the  common  use  of  the  word  in  the  New  Testament,  that 
here,  as  in  9,  4,  it  should  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  corijidence^ 
and  Iv  be  rendered  with.  '  I  speak  with  this  confidence  of 
boasting.' 

18.  Seeing  that  many  glory  after  the  flesh,  I  will 
glory  also. 

The  apostle  here  assigns  the  reason  of  his  glorying.  His 
opponents  so  magnified  themselves  and  their  services,  and  so 
depreciated  him  and  his  labours,  that  he  was  forced,  in  order 
to  maintain  his  influence  as  the  advocate  of  a  pure  gospel,  to 
set  forth  his  claims  to  the  confidence  of  the  people.  Seeing 
that  (cTret,  since^  because)  many  glory.  From  this,  as  w^ell  as 
from  other  intimations  abounding  in  this  epistle,  it  is  evident 
that  the  opposition  to  Paul  was  headed  not  by  one  man,  but 
by  a  body  or  class  of  false  teachers,  all  of  whom  were  Juda- 
izers.  They  gloried  after  the  flesh  {Kara  ttjv  arapKo).  This 
may  mean,  'they  gloried  as  to  the  flesh.'  Then  flesh  means 
what  is  external  and  adventitious,  such  as  their  Hebrew  de- 
scent, their  circumcision,  &c.  See  v.  22,  where  these  false 
teachers  are  represented  as  boasting  of  their  external  advan- 
tages. Compare  also  Gal.  6,  13  and  Phil.  3,  4,  where  the 
apostle  says  in  reference  to  the  same  class  of  opponents,  "  If 
any  other  man  thinketh  that  he  hath  whereof  he  jnight  trust 
in  the  flesh,  I  more."  The  sense  in  this  case  is  good  and  ap- 
propriate, but  it  would  require  iv  and  not  Kara.  See  10,  17 
11,  12.  12,  9,  &c.,  &c.  Kara  adpKa  more  properly  means  ae- 
cording  to  the  flesh,  i.  e.  according  to  corrupt  human  nature, 
as  opposed  to  Kara  Kvptov  in  the  preceding  verse.  These  men 
were  influenced  in  their  boasting  by  unworthy  motives.  I 
icill  glory  also.  Does  Paul  mean,  '  As  others  glory  after  the 
flesh,  I  also  will  glory  after  the  flesh'?  i.  e.  as  others  give 
way  to  their  selfish  feeUngs,  I  ^\dll  do  the  same.  This  is  the 
view  which  many  commentators  take.  They  say  that  Kara 
o-dp/ca  is  necessarily  implied  alter  Kdyoj  Kavx^crofxai,  because  the 
apostle  had  just  said  that  in  boasting  he  did  not  act  Kara  Kvptovj 
which  imjDlies  that  he  did  act  Kara  adpKa ;  and  because  in  the 
following  verse  he  makes  himself  one  of  dcfipove^  of  whose  glo- 
rying the  Corinthians  were  so  tolerant.  But  the  sense  thus 
expressed  is  neither  true  nor  consistent  with  the  character  of 


268  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  19.  20. 

the  apostle.  It  is  not  true  that  he  was  influenced  in  boasting 
by  corrupt  feelings;  that  self-conceit  and  the  desire  of  ap- 
plause Avei-e  in  him,  as  in  the  false  teachers,  the  motives  which 
governed  him  in  this  matter.  There  is  no  necessity  for  sup- 
plying Kara  adpKa  after  the  last  clause.  What  Paul  says  is, 
'  As  many  boast  from  unworthy  motives,  I  also  will  boast.' 
If  they  did  it  from  bad  motives,  he  might  well  do  it  from 
good  ones. 

19.  For  ye  suffer  fools  gladly,  seeing  ye  (your- 
selves) are  wise. 

That  is,  '  I  will  indulge  in  the  folly  of  boasting,  for  ye  are 
tolerant  of  fools.'  The  Corinthians  had,  to  a  degree  disgrace- 
ful to  themselves,  allowed  the  boasting  Judaizing  teachers  to 
gain  an  ascendency  over  them,  and  they  could  not,  therefore, 
with  any  consistency  object  to  the  self-vindication  of  Paul. 
Seeing  ye  are  wise.  As  it  is  the  part  of  the  wise  to  bear  with 
fools,  so  the  Corinthians  in  their  wisdom  might  bear  with  the 
apostle.  Of  course  this  is  said  ironically  and  as  a  reproof. 
In  the  same  spirit  and  with  the  same  purpose  he  had  said  to 
them  in  his  former  epistle,  4,  8,  "  We  are  fools,  but  ye  are 
w^ise." 

20.  Tor  ye  suffer,  if  a  man  bring  you  into  bondage, 
if  a  man  devour  (you),  if  a  man  take  (of  you),  if  a  man 
exalt  himself,  if  a  man  smite  you  on  the  face. 

They  might  well  bear  with  Paul  since  they  bore  with  the 
tyranny,  the  rapacity,  the  insolence,  and  the  violence  of  the 
false  teachers.  The  chai-acter  of  these  troublers  of  the  church 
was  evei-ywhere  the  same;  see  Gal.  1,7.  They  were  lords 
over  God's  heritage,  1  Pet.  5,  3,  not  only  as  they  endeavoured 
to  reduce  tlie  Christians  under  the  bondage  of  the  law,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  but  as  they  exercised 
a  tyrannical  authority  over  the  people.  To  this  the  apostle 
here  relers  when  lie  says.  If  any  man  bring  yon  into  bondage 
{KaTaS:>vXul)^  i.  e.  makes  slaves  of  you.  That  this  is  not  to  be 
limited  to  subjection  to  the  Jewish  law,  is  evident  from  what 
iollows,  which  is  an  aniplitication  of  the  idea  liere  ex])ressed. 
These  men  were  tyrants,  and  therefore  they  devoured,  insult- 
ed and  maltreated  the  people.  Jf'  any  man  devour  (you)^ 
i.  e,  rappciously  consumes  your  substance,  as  our  Lord  de- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  2L  269 

scribes  the  Pharisees  as  devouring  widows'  houses,  Matt. 
23,  14.  If  any  take  (of  you) ;  et  ns  A.a/x/3avet;  v/xas  is  to  be 
supplied  as  after  Kareo-^Ut,  in  the  preceding  clause.  "  7/^  «??2/ 
take  yoiQ^  i.  e.  capture  you  or  ensnare  you,  as  a  huntsman  his 
prey.  Our  version  by  supplying  of  you  alters  the  sense,  and 
makes  this  clause  express  less  than  the  preceding ;  devouring 
IS  a  stronger  expression  for  rapacity  than  'taking  of  you.» 
If  any  man  exalt  himself  (eTratperat,  sc.  koS  v/xCjv),  i.  e.  if  any 
one  proudly  and  insolently  lifts  himself  up  against  you.  And 
as  the  climax,  If  any  one  smite  you  on  the  face.  To  smite 
the  face  or  mouth  was  the  highest  indignity;  as  such  it  was 
offered  to  our  Lord,  Luke  22,  64,  and  to  Paul,  Acts  23,  2 ; 
see  also  1  Kings  22,  24.  Matt.  5,  39.  Such  was  the  treatment 
to  which  the  Corinthians  submitted  from  the  hands  of  the 
false  teachers ;  and  such  is  ever  the  tendency  of  unscriptural 
church-authority.  It  assumes  an  absolute  dependence  of  the 
people  on  the  clergy — an  inherent,  as  well  as  official  suj)eriori- 
ty  of  the  latter  over  the  former,  and  therefore  false  teachers 
have,  as  a  general  rule,  been  tyrants.  The  gospel,  and  of 
course  the  evangelical,  as  opposed  to  the  high-church  system 
of  doctrine,  is  incompatible  with  all  undue  authority,  because 
it  teaches  the  essential  equality  of  believers  and  opens  the 
way  to  grace  and  salvation  to  the  people  without  the  inter- 
vention of  a  priest. 

21.  I  speak  as  concerning  reproach,  as  though  we 
had  been  weak.  Howbeit,  whereinsoever  any  is  bold, 
(I  speak  foohshly)  I  am  bold  also. 

I  speak  as  concerning  reproach.  Kara  aTijXLav  Xcyou  means 
simply  I  reproach.  After  dn/xtai/  may  be  supplied  c/xt^v.  The 
sense  would  then  be,  '  I  say  to  my  own  shame,  that,  &c. ; ' 
A.€-ya>  being  understood  as  referring  to  what  follows.  '  I  say 
to  my  shame  that  I  was  weak.'  The  Greek  is,  Kara  an/xtai/ 
(cya^v)  COS  OTL  r)ix€L<i  y]a^€.vr](TafX€v ;  where  w?  on  may,  as  Winer, 
§  67,  1,  says,  be  a  redundancy  for  simply  ort  (5,  19.  2  Thess. 
2,  2.)  '  I  say  that.'^  This  would  be  a  direct  assertion  on  the  part 
of  Paul  that  he  was  weak  in  the  sense  intended.  It  is  better, 
with  Meyer  and  others,  to  give  ws  its  proper  force,  «5,  as  if 
His  being  weak  was  not  a  fact,  but  an  opinion  entertained  con- 
cerning him,  '  I  say  that  (as  people  think)  I  was  weak.'  One 
class  of  the  Corinthians  regarded  Paul  as  weak  in  bodily  pres« 


210  II.   CORINTHIANS    11,  21. 

ence  and  contemptible  in  speech,  10,  10.  In  reference  to  thia 
judgment  of  his  opponents  he  says,  'I  acknowledge  to  my  shame 
that,  when  present  with  you  (the  aorist,  >;cr^ev7^o-a/xfi/,  is  used), 
I  was  weak.'  In  1  Cor.  2,  3  he  told  the  Corinthians  that  he 
came  among  them  in  w^eakness  and  fear  and  much  trembhng. 
There  was  a  sense  in  which  he  admitted  and  professed  himself 
to  be  weak.  He  had  no  self-confidence.  He  did  not  beheve 
in  his  own  ability  to  persuade  or  convert  men.  He  felt  the 
responsibility  of  his  office,  and  he  relied  both  for  knowledge 
and  success  entirely  on  the  Spirit  of  God.  His  conceited  and 
arrogant  opposers  were  strong  in  their  own  estimation ;  they 
contemned  the  mean-spirited  apostle,  and  considered  him  des- 
titute of  all  sources  of  power.  The  weakness  of  which  Paul 
here  speaks  is  that  which  was  attributed  to  him  by  his  ene- 
mies. The  whole  preceding  context  is  ironical,  and  so  is  this 
clause.  '  Your  teachers  are  great  men,  I  am  nothing  com- 
pared to  them.  They  are  strong,  but,  I  say  it  to  my  shame, 
I  am  weak.  £ut,  as  opposed  to  this  imputed  weakness,  I 
am  equal  to  any  of  them,  I  speak  in  folly.'  Howheit  wherein- 
soever  any  is  hold  (iv  <S  8'  av  ns  roX/^a),  'But  w^hatever  they 
dare,  I  dare.  Whatever  claims  they  put  forth,  I  can  assert 
the  same.  If  they  boast,  I  can  outboast  them.  If  they  are 
Hebrews,  so  am  I,  &c.' 

The  foregoing  interpretation  of  this  passage,  which  as- 
sumes that  Xeyo)  in  the  first  clause  refers  to  what  follows,  and 
that  the  reproach  mentioned  had  Paul  for  its  object,  is  given 
by  Storr,  Flatt,  Meyer,  and  many  others.  The  great  majority 
of  commentators,  however,  understand  Xeym  as  referring  to 
what  precedes  and  the  Corinthians  and  not  Paul  to  be  the  ob- 
ject of  the  reproach.  '  I  say  this  to  yoi^r  shame.'  Compare 
1  Cor.  6,  5,  TTpos  ivTpoTTTjv  v/xtv  Xiyw.  (In  this  latter  passage, 
however,  it  will  be  remarked  that  the  preposition  is  irpos  and 
not  Kara,  as  in  the  passage  before  us,  and  that  v/mv  is  in  the 
text,  whereas  here  there  is  no  pronoun  used.)  The  two  prin- 
cipal objections  to  this  interpretation  are,  1.  That  if  /\eyo>  re- 
fers to  the  preceding  verses  the  sense  must  be,  '  I  make  this 
exhibition  of  the  character  of  your  teachers  in  order  to  shame 
you.'  This  would  do  very  well  if  what  follows  carried  out 
that  idea ;  but  instead  of  speaking  of  the  Corinthians,  and  en- 
deavouring to  convince  them  of  their  folly  in  adherintr  to  such 
men  as  teachers,  he  immediately  speaks  of  himself,  ana  shows 
how  he  was  despised  as  w^eak.  2.  According  to  this  inteqjre- 
tation  there  is  great  difficulty  in  explaining  the  following 


II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  22.  23.  ^71 

clause.  It  would  not  do  to  say,  *  I  speak  to  shame  jo\y  that 
I  was  weak ; '  or,  if  on  be  made  causal,  '  I  speak  to  shame  you 
because  I  was  weak,'  still  the  sense  is  not  good.  The  former 
interpretation  of  this  difficult  passage  is  therefore  to  be  pre- 
ferred. 

22.  Are  they  Hebrews?  so  (am)  I.  Are  they  Is- 
raelites ?  so  (am)  I.  Are  they  the  seed  of  Abraham  ? 
so  (am)  I. 

In  this  verse  the  apostle  begins  his  boasting  by  showing 
that  in  no  point  did  he  come  behind  his  opponents.  The 
three  designations  here  used  belonged  to  the  chosen  people. 
The  Hebrews  were  Israelites,  and  the  Israelites  were  the  seed 
of  Abraham.  The  first,  as  Meyer  remarks,  is  the  national 
designation  of  the  people  of  God  ;  the  second  their  theocratic 
appellation ;  and  the  third  marked  them  as  the  heirs  of  Abra- 
ham and  expectants  of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  Or,  as  Ben- 
gel  remarks  with  no  less  justice,  the  first  refers  to  their  nation- 
al, and  the  two  others  to  their  religious  or  spiritual  rektion. 
A  Hebrew  was  not  a  Jew  of  Palestine  as  distinguished  from 
the  Hellenists,  or  Jews  born  out  of  Palestine  and  speaking 
the  Greek  language.  For  Paul  himself  was  born  in  Tarsus, 
and  yet  was  a  Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews,  that  is,  a  man  of  pure 
Hebrew  descent.  In  Acts  6,  1  the  word  is  used  for  the  Jews 
of  Palestine  in  distinction  from  other  Jews,  but  it  is  obvious- 
ly not  so  either  here  or  in  Pliil.  3,  5. 

23.  Are  they  ministers  of  Clirist?  (I  speak  as 
a  fool)  I  (am)  more;  in  labom's  more  abundant,  in 
stripes  above  measm*e,  in  prisons  more  frequent,  in 
deaths  oft. 

In  all  that  related  to  the  privileges  of  birth,  as  belonging 
to  the  chosen  seed,  Paul  stood -on  a  level  with  the  chief  of  his 
opposers ;  in  all  that  related  to  Christ  and  his  service  he  stood 
far  above  them.  Are  they  the  ministers  of  Christ  f  Such 
they  were  by  profession,  and  such  for  the  moment  he  admits 
them  to  be,  although  in  truth  they  were  the  ministers  of  Satan, 
as  he  had  said  in  v.  15.  I  more  (wcp  eycu,  where  v-ip  is  used 
as  an  adverb)  This  may  mean  either,  I  am  more  than  a 
(Staxovos)  minister  of  Christ ;  or,  I  am  a  minister  or  servant  of 
12* 


272  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  24. 

Christ  in  a  higher  measure  than  they.  That  is,  I  am  more 
devoted,  laborious  and  suffering  than  they.  The  latter  is  the 
true  explanation  as  is  clear  from  what  follows,  and  because  in 
Paul's  language  and  estimation  there  Avas  no  higher  title  oi 
s(!rvice  than  that  of  minister  of  Christ.  /  speak  as  a  fool, 
Tvapacfiovrov  XaXw.  This  is  a  strong  expression,  *  I  speak  as  one 
beside  himself'  This  is  said  out  oi'  the  consciousness  of  ill- 
desert  and  utter  insufficiency.  Feelmg  himself  to  be  in  him- 
self both  impotent  and  unworthy,  this  self  laudation,  though 
having  reference  only  to  his  infirmities  and  to  what  God  had 
done  in  him  and  by  him,  was  in  the  highest  degree  painful 
and  humiliating  to  the  apostle.  It  is  Paul's  judgment  of  him- 
self, not  the  judgment  which  others  are  presumed  to  pass 
upon  him.  i?i  labours  more  abundant,  iv  kottoi?  Trcpto-o-oTcpws. 
There  are  three  ways  of  explaining  this  and  the  following 
clauses,  1.  In  (or,  iy)  labours  I  am  more  abundantly  the  ser- 
vant of  Christ.  2.  Or,  (supplying  yv  or  yeyom,)  I  have  been 
more  abundant  'in  labours.  3.  Or,  connecting,  as  De  Wette 
and  Meyer  do,  the  adverbs  with  the  substantives  with  the  sense 
of  adjectives,  ^y  more  abmidant  labours.  This  latter  explana- 
tion can  better  be  carried  through,  and  expresses  the  sense 
clearly.  In  stripes  above  measure,  iv  TrXryyats  v-n-epfSaXXovTo)^^ 
i.  e.  by  strij^es  exceeding  measure  (in  frequency  and  severity). 
In  prisons  more  frequent,  either,  as  before,  '  I  have  been  more 
frequently  imprisoned,'  or,  '  By  more  frequent  prisons.'  The 
sense  remains  the  same.  In  deaths  oft,  iv  .^ai/arots  TroAAaKts, 
by  rnaiiifold  deaths.  Paul,  in  accordance  with  common 
usage,  elsewhere  says,  "  I  die  daily."  He  suffered  a  thousand 
deaths,  in  the  sense  of  being  constantly  in  imminent  danger 
of  death  and  of  enduring  its  terrors, 

24.  25.  Of  the  Jews  five  times  received  I  forty 
(stripes)  save  one.  Thrice  was  I  beaten  with  rods, 
once  was  I  stoned,  thrice  I  suffered  shipwreck,  a  night 
and  a  day  I  have  been  in  the  deep. 

These  verses  are  a  parenthesis  designed  to  confirm  tha 
preceding  assertion  that  he  had  laboured  and  suffered  more 
in  the  service  of  Christ  than  any  of  his  opponents.  In  v.  26 
the  construction  is  resumed.  The  apostle  had  at  this,  period 
of  his  history  been  scourged  eight  times ;  five  times  by  the 
Jews  and  thrice  by  the  Romans.     Of  this  cruel  ill-treatment 


II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  2(5.  273 

at  the  hands  of  his  OTvn  countryinen,  the  Acts  of  the  \postleg 
coTjcain  no  record;  and  of  the  three  occasions  on  which  he 
vrar-  beaten  with  rods,  that  mentioned  in  Acts  16,  22  as  having 
occirred  at  Philippi  is  the  only  one  of  which  we  have  else- 
whtire  any  account.  In  the  law  of  Moses,  Deut.  25,  3,  it  was 
forbidden  to  inflict  more  than  forty  stripes  on  an  offender,  and 
it  appears  that  the  Jews,  in  their  punctilious  observance  of 
the  letter  of  the  law,  were  in  the  habit  of  inflicting  only 
thiity-nine  so  as  to  be  sure  not  to  transgress  the  prescribed 
limit.  From  the  distinction  which  the  apostle  makes  between 
receiving  stripes  at  the  hands  of  the  Jews  and  being  beaten 
with  rods,  it  is  probable  that  the  Jews  were  at  that  period 
accustomed  to  use  a  lash.  The  later  Rabbis  say  that  the 
scourge  was  made  with  three  thongs,  so  that  each  blow  in- 
flicted three  stripes ;  and  that  only  thirteen  strokes  were 
givea  to  make  up  the  prescribed  number  of  thirty-nine  lashes. 
Once  was  I  stoned.  Acts  14,  19.  On  this  occasion  his  ene- 
mies supposed  he  was  dead.  He  must  therefore  have  been 
rendered  for  the  time  insensible.  Thrice  I  suffered  shijmrecJc, 
Of  this  we  have  no  mention  in  the  Acts.  The  shipwreck  in 
which  Paul  was  involved  on  his  journey  to  Rome,  was  at  a 
much  later  period.  A  night  and  a  day  have  I  been  in  the 
deep.  That  is,  for  that  length  of  time  he  was  tossed  about  by 
the  waves,  clinging  to  a  fragment  of  a  wreck.  A  night  and 
day  {yvx^w^pov)^  i.  e.  a  whole  day  of  twenty-four  hours.  The 
Jews  commenced  the  day  at  sunset. 

26.  (In)  journeyings  often,  (in)  perils  of  waters, 
(in)  perils  of  robbers,  (in)  perils  by  (mine  own)  coun- 
trymen, (in)  perils  by  the  heathen,  (in)  perils  in  the 
city,  (in)  perils  in  the  wilderness,  (in)  perils  in  the  sea, 
(ill)  perils  among  false  brethren. 

Our  translators  have  throughout  this  passage  supplied  the 
preposition  m.  But  as  cv  in  the  preceding  verse  is  used  in- 
strumentally,  so  here  we  have  the  instrumental  dative,  by 
joimieyings.,  by  perils.,  &c.  It  was  by  voluntarily  exposing 
himself  to  these  dangers,  and  by  the  endurance  of  these  sut- 
ferings  the  apostle  proved  his  superior  claim  to  be  regarded 
as  a  devoted  minister  of  Christ.  Perils  of  water.,  literally,  of 
rivers  ;  as  distinguished  from  the  dangers  of  the  sea  mentioned 
afterwards.     History  shows  that  in  the  country  traversed  in 


274  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  27. 

Paul's  journeys  great  danger  was  often  encountered  in  passing 
the  rivers  which  crossed  his  path.  Perils  of  robbers^  to  which 
all  travellers  were  exposed.  Perils  from  my  own  countrymen 
(e/c  yeVovs  as  opposed  to  €^  e^voiv).  The  Jews  were,  at  least  in 
most  cases,  the  first  to  stir  up  opposition  and  to  excite  the 
mob  against  the  apostle.  This  was  the  case  at  Damascus, 
Acts  9,  23  ;  at  Jerusalem,  Acts  9,  29 ;  at  Antioch  in  Pisidia, 
Acts  13,  50  ;  at  Iconium,  14,  5  ;  at  Lystra,  14,  19  ;  at  Thessa- 
lonica.  Acts  17,  5 ;  at  Berea,  Acts  17,  13  ;  at  Corinth,  18,  12. 
From  the  Gentiles,  as  at  Philippi  and  Ephesus.  In  the  city^ 
as  in  Damascus,  Jerusalem  and  Ephesus.  In  the  desert.  The 
dangers  of  the  desert  are  proverbial.  Paul  traversed  Arabia, 
as  well  as  the  mountainous  regions  of  Asia  Minor,  and  was 
doubtless  often  exposed  in  these  journeys  to  the  dangers  of 
robbers,  as  well  as  those  arising  from  exposure,  and  hunger 
and  thirst.  Of  the  sea,  not  only  in  the  case  of  shipwreck  be- 
fore mentioned,  but  to  other  and  lesser  perils.  Perils  among 
false  brethren,  referring  probably  to  the  treachery  of  those 
who  falsely  professed  to  be  his  brethren  in  Christ,  and  yet 
endeavoured  to  deliver  him  into  the  power  of  his  enemies. 

27.  In  weariness  and  painfulness,  in  watchings 
often,  in  hunger  and  thirst,  in  fastings  often,  in  cold 
and  nakedness. 

Here  the  preposition  Iv  is  again  used,  but  in  its  instru- 
mental sense  by.  It  was  by  these  trials  and  sufferings  he 
proved  himself  to  be  what  he  claimed  to  be.  By  weariness 
and  paw  fulness,  iv  kotto)  koL  fxoxd^w.  These  words  are  thus  as- 
sociated in  1  Thess.  2,  9,  and  2  Thess.  3,  8,  in  both  of  which 
places  they  are  rendered  "  labour  and  travail."  They  both 
express  the  idea  of  wearisome  toil  and  the  consequent  ex- 
haustion and  suffering.  Py  icatchings  often,  referring  to  the 
sleepless  nights  which  he  was  often  compelled  by  business  or 
suffering  to  pass.  In  hunger  a7id  thirst,  iii  fastings  often. 
The  common  meaning  of  the  word  vqarda,  and  its  connection 
Avith  the  words  "  hunger  and  thirst,"  implying  involuntary  ab- 
stinence from  food,  are  urged  as  reasons  for  undei-standing  it 
to  mean  voluntary  fasting.  But  the  context  is  in  favour  of  the 
common  interpretation  which  makes  it  refer  to  involuntary  ab- 
stinence. Every  other  particular  here  mentioned  belongs  to 
the  class  of  sufferings ;  and  it  would  therefore  be  incongruous 


II.    CORINTHIANS   11,  28.  275 

ro  introduce  into  this  enumeration  any  thing  so  insignificant 
and  so  common  as  religious  fasting.  In  this  the  Pharisees 
were  his  equals  and  probably  far  his  superior.  They  fasted 
twice  in  the  week.  Paul  was  no  ascetic,  and  certainly  did  not 
deny  himself  food  to  the  extent  of  making  that  denial  an  act  of 
heroism.  It  is  remarkable  that  we  have  no  record  of  Paul's 
ever  having  fasted  at  all,  unless  Acts  13,  3.  Bi/  cold  and  na- 
kedness.  This  completes  the  picture.  The  greatest  of  the 
apostles  here  appears  before  us,  his  back  lacerated  by  frequent 
scourgings,  his  body  Avorn  by  hunger,  thirst,  and  exposure ; 
cold  and  naked,  persecuted  by  Jews  and  Gentiles,  driven  from 
place  to  place  without  any  certain  dwelling.  This  passage, 
more  perhaps  than  any  other,  makes  even  the  most  laborious 
of  the  modern  ministers  of  Christ  hide  their  face  in  shame. 
What  have  they  ever  done  or  suffered  to  compare  with  v/hat 
this  apostle  did  ?  It  is  a  consolation  to  know  that  Paul  is  now 
as  pre-eminent  in  glory,  as  he  was  here  in  suffering. 


28.  Besides  those  things  that  are  without,  that 
which  Cometh  upon  me  daily,  the  care  of  all  the 
churches. 

This  verse  is  variously  interpreted.  The  first  clause,  Be- 
sides those  thi7igs  which  ore  loithout^  is  rendered  in  the  same 
way  in  the  Yulgate.  Praeter  ilia,  quae  extrinsecus  sunt.  So 
also  Calvin,  Beza,  and  others.  But  this  is  contrary  to  the 
usage  of  the  words  ra.  Trape/cro?,  which  mean,  the  things  besides^ 
I.  e.  other  things;  so  that  the  sense  of  the  clause  x^^p'^?  t^^ 
7rap€KT09  is,  'Not  to  mention  other  things.'  The  preceding 
enumeration,  copious  as  it  is,  was  not  exhaustive.  There 
were  other  things  of  a  hke  nature  which  the  apostle  would 
not  stop  to  mention,  but  proceeded  to  another  class  of  trials. 
That  class  included  his  exhausting  official  duties.  That  which 
cometh  on  me  daily^  viz.,  the  care  of  all  the  churches.  The 
latter  clause  is,  according  to  this  explanation,  assumed  to  be 
explanatory  of  the  former.  The  same  view  is  taken  of  the 
r3lation  of  the  two  clauses  by  Meyer,  who  renders  the  passage 
thus:  "My  daily  attention,  the  care  of  all  the  churches." 
This  latter  interpretation  assumes  that  instead  of  eTrio-vo-rao-t'?, 
which  is  in  the  common  text,  the  true  reading  is  e7rtcrTacrt9,  a 
reading  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Riickert, 
and  others.     Both  words  are  used  in  the  sense  of  concourse, 


2^6  II.   CORINTHIAI^S   11,  29.    • 

tumult,  as  of  the  people,  see  Acts  24, 12,  but  the  former  has 
also  the  sense  of  care,  or  attention.  If  the  corrected  text  be 
adopted,  then  the  interpretation  just  mentioned  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred. '  Without  mentioning  other  things,  (r/  eTriVracrt?  fxov  rj 
Ka^'  rjixipav)  my  daily  oversight,  the  care  of  all  the  church.' 
If  the  common  text,  although  not  so  well  sustained,  be  ad- 
hered to,  the  meaning  j^robably  is,  'My  daily  concourse 
{quotidlani  hominmn  imjoetus).  That  is,  the  crowding  upon 
him  every  day  of  people  demanding  his  attention.  This  ia 
the  sense  expressed  by  Luther ;  "  Dass  ich  taglich  werde  ati- 
gelaufen,  und  trage  Sorge  fur  alle  Gemeinen."  The  solicitude 
Avhich  the  apostle  felt  for  the  churches  w^hich  he  had  founded, 
is  apparent  from  all  his  epistles ;  and  it  may  be  easily  im- 
agined how  various  and  constant  must  have  been  the  causes 
and  occasions  of  anxiety  and  trouble  on  their  account. 

29.  Who  is  weak,  and  I  am  not  weak?  who  is  of- 
fended, and  I  burn  not  ? 

That  is,  he  sympathized  with  his  fellow  Christians,  who 
were  his  children  in  the  faith,  so  that  their  sorrows  and  suffer- 
ings were  his  own.  This  was  the  consequence  not  only  of  the 
communion  of  saints,  in  virtue  of  which,  "  if  one  member  suf- 
fer, all  the  members  suffer  w^ith  it ;  or  one  member  be  hon- 
oured, all  the  members  rejoice  with  it,"  1  Cor.  12,  26;  but 
also  of  the  peculiar  relation  which  Paul  sustained  to  the 
churches,  which  he  had  himself  planted.  IV/w  is  loeak ;  i.  e. 
in  faith,  or  scrupulous  through  want  of  knowledge,  compare 
1  Cor.  9,  22,  and  I  am  not  iceaJc  ?  That  is,  with  whose  in- 
fii-mities  of  faith  and  knowledge  do  I  not  sympathize  ?  He 
pitied  their  infirmities  and  bore  with  their  prejudices.  To 
the  Aveak,  he  became  as  weak.  There  are  men,  says  Calvin, 
who  either  despise  the  infirmities  of  their  brethren,  or  trample 
them  under  their  feet.  Such  men  know  little  of  their  own 
liearts,  and  have  little  of  the  spirit  of  Paul  or  of  Paul's  master. 
God  never  quenches  the  smoking  flax.  Who  is  offended 
(o-Kav8aA.t^€rat),  i.  e.  caused  to  stumble,  or  led  into  sin ;  and  1 
hum  not.  That  is,  and  I  am  not  indignant?  It  was  not  to 
Paul  a  matter  of  indifference  when  any  of  the  brethren,  by 
the  force  of  evil  example,  or  by  the  seductions  of  false  teach- 
ers, were  led  to  depart  from  the  truth  or  to  act  inconsistently 
with  their  profession.  Such  events  filled  him  not  only  with 
grief  at  the  fall  of  the  weak,  but  with  indignation  at  the  au- 


II.    CORINTHIANS   11,  30.31.  277 

thors  of  their  fall.  Thus  his  mind  was  kept  in  a  state  of  con- 
stant  agitation  by  his  numerous  anxieties  and  his  wide-hearted 
sympathy. 

30.  If  I  must  needs  glory,  I  will  glory  of  the 
things  which  concern  mine  infirmities. 

Paul's  boasting  was  not  like  that  of  the  false  teachers. 
They  boasted  not  only  of  their  descent,  but  of  their  learning, 
eloquence,  and  personal  advantages ;  he  boasted  only  of  the 
things  which  implied  weakness,  his  sufferings  and  privations. 
The  future,  Kavxrjo-o [xat,  expresses  a  general  purpose,  illustrated 
in  the  past,  and  not  having  reference  merely  to  what  was  to 
come.  The  persecutions,  the  poverty,  the  scourgings,  the 
hunger  and  nakedness  of  which  Paul  had  boasted,  were  not 
things  in  which  men  of  the  world  pride  themselves,  or  which 
commonly  attract  human  applause. 

31.  The  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
which  is  blessed  for  evermore,  knoweth  that  I  lie  not. 

This  is  a  peculiarly  solemn  asseveration.  An  oath  is  the 
act  of  caUing  God  to  witness  the  truth  of  what  we  say.  Here 
the  appeal  is  not  simply  to  God  as  God,  but  to  God  in  his  pe- 
culiar covenant  relation  to  believers.  When  the  Israelite 
called  on  Jehovah  as  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob, 
he  recognized  him  not  only  as  the  creator  and  moral  governor 
of  the  world,  but  as  the  covenant  God  of  his  nation.  So  the 
Christian  when  he  calls  God  "  The  God  and  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  recognizes  him  not  only  as  his  Creator, 
but  as  the  author  of  redemption  through  his  eternal  Son. 
Jesus  Christ  is  a  designation  of  the  Theanthropos,  the  histori- 
cal person  so  named  and  known,  to  whom  God  stood  in  the 
relation  at  once  of  God  and  Father.  Our  Lord  had  a  de- 
pendent nature  to  which  God  stood  in  the  relation  of  God, 
and  a  divine  nature  to  which  He  stood  in  the  relation  of 
Father,  and  therefore  to  the  complex  person  Jesus  Christ 
God  bore  the  relation  of  both  God  and  Father. 

There  is  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  reference  of  this 
passage.  Some  suppose  that  the  apostle  intended  by  this  oath 
to  confirm  the  truth  of  the  whole  preceding  exhibition  of  his 
labours  and  sufferings ;  others,  that  it  is  to  be  confined  to  the 
assertion  in  v.  30,  viz.,  that  he  would  boast  only  of  his  infirmi-. 


2*78  II.   CORINTHIANS   11,  32. 

ties ;  others,  as  Calvin  and  many  others,  refer  it  to  what  fol- 
lows, i.  e.,  to  the  account  which  he  was  about  to  give  of  his 
escape  from  Damascus.  To  give  tliis  explanation  the  more 
plausibility,  Meyer  assumes  that  Paul  had  intended  to  intro- 
duce an  extended  narrative  of  his  escape  and  sufferings,  be- 
ginning with,  the  incident  at  Damascus,  but  was  interrupted 
and  did  not  carry  out  his  intention.  As,  however,  there  is  no 
intimation  of  this  in  the  context,  it  is  probable  that  the  refer- 
ence is  to  the  whole  of  the  preceding  narrative.  He  intended 
to  satisfy  his  readers  that  he  had  not  exaggerated  or  over- 
stated his  sufferings.  God  knew  that  all  be  had  said  was 
true. 


32.  In  Damascus  the  governor  under  Aretas  the 
king  kept  the  city  of  the  Damascenes  with  a  garrison, 
desirous  to  apprehend  me. 

It  is  useless  to  inquire  why  Paul  introduces,  as  it  were,  as 
an  after-thought,  this  disconnected  account  of  his  escape  from 
Damascus.  It  is  enough  that  the  fact  occurred  to  him  when 
writing,  and  that  he  saw  fit  to  record  it.  The  account  here 
given  agrees  with  that  found  in  Acts  9,  24.  25,  except  that 
there  the  attempt  to  apprehend  the  apostle  is  attributed  to 
the  Jews,  and  here  to  the  governor  of  the  city.  There  is  no 
inconsistency  between  the  two.  The  governor  acted  no  doubt 
at  the  instigation  of  the  Jews.  He  had  no  grievance  of  his 
own  to  redress  or  avenge.  The  governor,  or  ethnarch^  a  term 
applied  to  a  vassal  prince,  or  ruler  appointed  by  a  sovereign 
over  a  city  or  province.  Governor  under ^  literally,  q/*  Aretas 
the  king.  Aretas  was  a  common  name  of  Arabian  kings,  as 
Pharaoh  of  the  kings  of  Egypt.  A  king  of  that  name  is  men- 
tioned as  contemporary  with  the  high-priest  Jason,  and  with  the 
king  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  The  one  here  referred  to  was  the 
father-in-law  of  Herod  Antipas.  Herod  having  repudiated 
the  daughter  of  Aretas,  the  latter  declared  war  against  him 
and  totally  defeated  his  army.  Vitellius,  proconsul  of  Syria, 
undertook  to  punish  him  for  this  assault  on  a  Roman  vassal, 
but  was  arrested  on  his  march  by  the  death  of  the  emperor 
Tiberius.  It  is  commonly  supposed  that  it  was  during  this 
respite  that  Aretas,  who  was  king  of  Petra,  gained  temporary 
possession  of  Damascus.  Kept  the  city  of  the  Damascenes^ 
not,  besieged  the  city,  but  as  it  is  expressed  in  Acts,  watched 


II.   CORINTHIANS    11,  33.  279 

the  gates.  The  words  of  the  Damascenes  (rrjv  ^aixaa-K-qvCjv 
TToXtv)  are  omitted  in  the  original  edition  of  1611  of  King 
James's  version,  but  are  now  found  in  all  the  copies.  With  a 
garHso7i.  The  word  is  simply  icftpovpec,  he  kept^  or  guarded. 
Desirous  to  apprehend  me.  The  governor  set  a  guard  at  the 
gates  to  seize  the  apostle  should  he  attempt  to  leave  the 
city. 

33.  And  through  a  window  in  a  basket  w^as  I  let 
down  by  the  wall,  and  escaped  his  hands. 

Through  a  window,  -^vpts,  a  little  door^  or  aperture.  This 
was  either  an  aperture  in  the  wall  itself,  or,  as  is  more  proba- 
ble, a  window  of  a  house  built  upon  the  walls  of  the  city.  A 
representation  of  these  overhanging  houses  as  still  to  be  seen 
on  the  walls  of  Damascus,  may  be  found  in  Conybeare  and 
Howson's  life  of  St.  Paul,  p.  98  of  the  8vo^  edition.  The  same 
mode  of  escape  was  adopted  by  the  spies  mentioned  in  Joshua 
2,  15,  and  by  David,  1  Sam.  19,  12. 


CHAPTER   XII. 


The  account  of  a  remarkable  vision  granted  to  the  apostle,  vs.  1-6.  The 
other  evidences  of  his  apostleship,  and  his  conduct  and  purooses  in  the 
exercise  of  his  office,  vs.  7-21. 

PauVs  revelations  and  visions. 

He  would  give  over  boasting,  and  refer  not  to  what  he  had 
done,  but  to  what  God  had  done  ;  not  to  scenes  in  which  he 
was  the  agent,  but  to  those  in  which  he  was  merely  the  sub- 
ject— to  revelations  and  visions.  He  had  been  caught  up  to 
the  third  heavens,  and  received  communications  and  revela- 
tions which  he  was  not  permitted  to  make  known.  This  was 
to  him,  and  to  all  who  believed  his  word,  a  more  reliable  evi- 
dence of  the  favour  of  God  to  him  as  an  apostle  than  any  thing 
he  had  yet  mentioned,  vs.  1-6.  With  this  extraordinary  proof 
of  the  divine  favour  there  was  given  him  some  painful  bodily 
affection,  from  which  he  could  not  be  delivered,  in  order  to 


280  II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  1. 

keep  him  duly  humble,  vs.  Y-10.  This  reference  to  his  per 
sonal  experience  was  exceedingly  painful  to  him.  He  had 
been  forced  by  their  unreasonable  opposition  to  speak  of  him- 
self as  he  had  done ;  for  the  external  signs  of  his  apostleship 
should  have  convinced  them  that  he  was  the  immediate  mes^ 
senger  of  Christ,  vs.  11.12.  They  themselves  were  a  standing 
proof  that  he  was  truly  an  apostle.  They  were  not  less  richly 
endowed  than  other  churches  founded  by  other  apostles.  If 
inferior  at  ah,  it  was  only  that  he  had  refused  to  be  supported 
by  them.  Tms  he  could  not  help.  He  was  determined  to 
pursue  in  the  future  the  course  in  that  matter  which  he  had 
hitherto  adopted ;  neither  by  himself  nor  by  others,  neither 
mediately  noi  iinmediately,  would  he  receive  any  thing  at 
their  hands,  v».  a3-18.  All  this  self-vindication  was  of  little 
account.  It  wa»  a  small  matter  what  they  thought  of  him. 
God  is  the  only  competent  and  final  judge.  His  fear  was  that 
when  he  reached  Oorinth  he  would  be  forced  to  appear  as  a 
judge ;  that  not  finding  them  what  he  desired  them  to  be,  he 
should  be  obliged  to  assume  the  aspect  of  a  reprover,  vs. 
19-21. 

1.  It  is  not  expedient  for  me  doubtless  to  glory. 
I  will  come  to  visions  and  revelations  of  the  Lord. 

The  authorities  difier  much  as  to  the  text  in  this  verse. 
The  common  text  has  8-^  {indeed^  doubtless)  with  few  MSS.  or 
versions  in  its  support.  Many  of  the  oldest  MSS.  read  Set,  it 
is  necessary  ;  some  few  8e,  which  is  adopted  by  Meyer  as  the 
original  reading.  The  difierence  is  only  as  to  the  shades  of 
the  thought.  The  idea  is  that  boasting  is  not  expedient ;  he 
will  pass  to  something  else,  or  at  least  to  things  which  implied 
no  agency  or  superior  power  on  his  part.  Is  not  expedient. 
Here  again  some  MSS.  read  with  the  common  text,  ov  o-i;/x^€- 
pct  /aot,  eAevo-o/xat  yap,  {is  not  expedient  foT  me^  for  I xoill  coine\) 
others  with  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  and  Ruckert,  ov  (Tv^<^ipov 
fxev,  ikevaofxaL  Se,  (it  is  7iot  expedient  indeed^  hut  I  will  come.) 
The  common  text  is  on  the  whole  to  be  preferred.  Boasting, 
the  apostle  says,  is  not  expedient  for  me,  either  in  the  sense 
that  it  does  not  become  me,  is  not  a  seemly  or  proper  thing; 
(»r,  is  not  profitable  ;  does  not  contribute  to  set  my  apostleship 
in  a  clear  light.  There  is  a  better  way  of  proving  my  divine 
mission  than  by  boasting.  The  former  explanation  is  better 
Buited  to  the  apostle's  mode  of  representation.     He  had  re- 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  2.  28! 

peatedly  spoken  of  boasting  as  a  kind  of  folly,  something  de- 
rogatory and  painful.  He  expresses  the  same  feeling  here 
when  he  says  it  is  not  expedient.  I  will  come.  Our  translat- 
ors omit  the  yap, /or  I  loill  come.  The  connection  is  with  a 
thought  omitted.  Boasting  is  not  expedient,  (therefore  I  de- 
sist,) for  I  will  pass  to  something  else.  What  follows  in  the 
relation  of  the  revelations  made  to  him,  was  no  self-laudation, 
but  a  recital  of  God's  goodness.  Visions  and  revelations. 
The  latter  term  is,  on  the  one  hand,  more  general  than  the 
former,  as  there  might  be  revelations  where  there  were  no 
visions;  and,  on  the  other,  the  latter  is  higher  than  the  for- 
mer, as  implying  a  disclosure  of  the  import  of  the  things  seen. 
Of  the  Lord ;  not  visions  of  which  the  Lord  was  the  object; 
it  was  not  seeing  the  Lord  that  he  here  speaks  of,  but  visions 
and  revelations  of  which  the  Lord  is  the  author.  By  Lord  is 
obviously  to  be  understood  Christ,  whose  continued  existence 
and  divine  power  over  the  thoughts  and  states  of  the  soul  is 
hereby  recognized. 

2.  I  knew  a  man  in  Christ  above  fourteen  years 
ago,  (whether  in  the  body,  I  cannot  tell ;  or  whether 
out  of  the  body,  I  cannot  tell :  God  knoweth ;)  such 
an  one  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven. 

He  speaks  of  himself  in  the  third  person,  "I  knew  a  man." 
Why  he  does  this  is  not  clear.  He  narrates  what  had  hap- 
pened as  though  he  had  been  a  spectator  of  the  scene,  perhaps 
because  his  own  activity  was  so  completely  in  abeyance.  A 
man  in  Christ;  a  man  who  was  in  Christ;  the  scriptural 
designation  of  a  Christian,  because  union  with  Christ  makes  a 
man  a  Christian.  It  is  the  one  only  indispensable  condition 
of  salvation ;  so  that  all  who  are  in  Christ  are  saved,  and  all 
who  are  out  of  Christ  perish.  It  is  also  the  plain  doctrine  of 
the  Bible  that,  so  far  as  adults  are  concerned,  this  saving- 
union  with  Christ  is  conditioned,  not  on  any  thing  external, 
not  on  union  with  this  or  that  external  church,  but  on  a  per- 
sonal appropriating  act  of  faith,  by  which  we  receive  and  rest 
on  Christ  alone  for  salvation.  And  still  further,  it  is  no  less 
clearly  taught  that  holiness  of  heart  and  life  is  the  certain 
|\-uit  and  therefore  the  only  satisfactory  evidence  of  the  genu- 
ineness of  tnat  faith.  Above  fourteen  years  ago.  The  event 
referred  to  in  this  verse  is  not  the  same  as  that  which  occurred 


282  II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  3.  4. 

at  tlie  time  of  Paul's  conversion.  That  was  a  vision  of  Christ 
to  the  apootle  here  on  earth,  this  was  a  translation  of  the 
apostle  into  heaven ;  that  occurred  twenty  years  before  the 
pi'obable  date  of  this  epistle.  So  that  the  two  agree  neither 
in  nature,  nor  in  the  time  of  their  occurrence.  Whether  in 
the  body  or  out  of  the  hocly^  I  cannot  tell.  The  point  as  to 
which  Paul  was  in  doubt,  was  not  the  nature  of  the  event, 
not  as  to  whether  it  was  a  mere  exaltation  of  his  conscious- 
ness  and  perceptions  or  a  real  translation,  but  simply  whether 
that  translation  was  of  the  soul  separated  from  the  body,  or 
of  the  body  and  soul  together.  Though  heaven  is  a  state,  it 
is  also  a  place.  According  to  the  scriptural  representation, 
more  is  necessary  to  our  introduction  into  heaven  than  mere- 
ly opening  the  eyes  to  what  is  now  about  us  and  around  us. 
The  gloriBed  body  of  our  Lord  is  somewhere,  and  not  every- 
where. &uch  an  one  caught  up ;  apTrayeVra,  carried  away., 
the  proper  term  to  express  a  removal  from  one  place  to  an- 
other without  the  agency  of  the  subject.  Paul  was  entirely 
passive  in  the  translation  of  which  he  here  speaks.  Comp. 
Acts  8,  39.  1  Thess.  4,  17,  "Caught  up  to  meet  the  Lord  in 
the  air."  To  the  third  heaven.  This  means  either  the  highest 
heavens ;  or,  on  the  assumption  that  Paul  used  the  language 
and  intended  to  conform  to  the  ideas  of  the  Rabbins  who 
taught  that  there  were  seven  heavens,  it  means  the  air,  the 
region  of  the  clouds.  He  was  caught  up  into  the  air,  and 
then  still  further  raised  to  Paradise.  The  former  explanation 
is  to  be  preferred,  1.  Because  there  is  no  evidence  that  the 
opinions  of  the  Jewish  writers,  whose  works  are  still  extant, 
were  prevalent  at  the  time  of  the  apostle.  2.  Because  there 
is  no  evidence  in  the  New  Testament  that  the  sacred  writers 
adopted  those  opinions.  3.  Because  if  Paul  believed  and 
taught  that  there  were  seven  heavens,  that  is,  if  he  sanctioned 
the  Rabbinical  doctrine  on  that  subject,  it  would  be  a  part  of 
Christian  doctrine,  which  it  is  not.  It  is  no  part  of  the  faith 
of  the  Christian  church.  4.  Because  it  is  plain  that  the  "  third 
heaven  "  and  "paradise"  are  synonymous  terms  ;  and  paradise, 
as  is  admitted,  at  least  by  those  who  suppose  that  Paul  here 
speaks  as  a  Jew,  means  heaven. 

3.  4.  And  I  knew  such  a  man,  (whether  in  the 
oody,  or  out  of  the  body,  I  cannot  tell :  God  knoweth  ;) 
how  that  he  was  caught  up  into  paradise,  and  heai'd 


II.    CORINTHIAlSrS   12,  5.  6.  283 

unspeakable  words,  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  mun  to 
utter. 

This  is  a  repetition  of  v.  2,  with  the  exception  of  the  sub- 
stitution of  the  word  "paradise"  for  the  phrase  "the  third 
heaven."  Paradise  is  a  word  of  Sanscrit  origin,  and  signifies 
a  park,  or  garden.  It  is  used  in  the  Septnagint,  Gen.  2,  8,  in 
the  description  of  Eden,  which  was  a  paradise  or  garden.  The 
word  Avas  early  used  among  the  Jews  as  a  designation  of 
heaven,  or  the  abode  of  the  blessed  after  death,  as  appears 
from  Luke  23,  43,  (compare  Ecclesiasticus  40,  17.  28.)  In 
Rev.  2,  7,  it  occurs  in  the  same  sense.  And  heard  unspeahof 
hie  words^  app-qra  prjfxaTa^  literally,  unspoken  words ;  here  ob- 
viously the  meaning  is  words  not  to  be  spoken,  as  explained 
by  what  follows.  Which  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man  to  utter. 
The  communications  made  to  the  apostle  he  was  not  allowed 
to  make  kno^vTi  to  others.  The  veil  which  conceals  the  mys- 
teries and  glories  of  heaven  God  has  not  permitted  to  be 
raised.  It  is  enough  that  we  know  that  in  that  world  the 
saints  shall  be  made  perfectly  holy  and  perfectly  blessed  in 
the  full  enjoyment  of  God  forever. 

5.  Of  such  an  one  ^voll  I  glory  :  yet  of  myself  I  will 
not  glory,  but  in  mine  infirmities. 

Of  such  a  one.,  vTvkp  rov  tolovtov,  for  such  a  one,  i.  e.  in  his 
behalf;  or,  v-rrip  being  taken  in  the  sense  of  Trcpi,  about,  or 
concerning.  This  latter  gives  the  better  sense.  '  Concerning 
such  a  person  I  will  glory.'  This  is  equivalent  to  saying, 
'  Such  an  event  is  a  just  ground  of  glorying.'  But  tolovtov  is 
not  to  be  taken  as  neuter,  (of  such  a  thing,)  as  is  plain  from 
the  antithetical  e/xaurov.  '  Of  such  a  one,  but  not  of  myself' 
The  translation  which  he  had  experienced  was  a  proper 
ground  of  boasting,  because  it  was  a  gratuitous  favour.  It 
implied  no  superiority  on  the  part  of  the  subject  of  this  act  of 
divine  goodness,  and  therefore  might  be  gloried  in  without 
assuming  any  special  merit  to  himself  Of  mt/ self  J  lo ill  not 
glory  ;  that  is,  he  would  not  boast  of  his  personal  qualities  as 
entitling  him  to  admiration.  JSut  (et  /jltj,  except)  in  my  in- 
firmities. That  is,  'I  will  boast  concerning  myself  only  of 
those  things  which  prove  or  imply  my  own  weakness.' 

6.  Por  though  I  would  desire  to  glory,  I  shall  not 


284  II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  7. 

be  a  fool ;  for  I  will  say  the  truth :  but  (now)  I  for- 
bear, lest  any  man  should  think  of  me  above  that 
which  he  seeth  me  (to  be),  or  (that)  he  heareth  of  me. 

The  connection  as  indicated  by  (yap)  ,/br,  is  not  immedi- 
ately with  what  is  expressed  in  the  preceding  verse,  but  with 
a  thought  obviously  implied.  Paul  had  said  he  would  not 
glory  concerning  himself.  The  reason  for  this  determination 
was  not  the  want  of  grounds  of  boasting.  '  I  could  do  it,  for 
if  I  chose  to  boast,  /  should  not  he  a  fool ;  i.  e.  an  empty 
boaster — for  I  would  speak  the  truth.'  But  I  forbear  (^etSo- 
/xat  8c  sc.  rov  Kavya(T^a.i).  Abundant  as  were  the  materials  for 
boasting  at  the  apostle's  command,  justly  as  he  could  refer  to 
the  extraordinary  gifts  with  which  he  was  endowed,  and  the 
extraordinary  success  which  had  attended  his  labours,  he  did 
not  dwell  on  these  things.  The  reason  which  he  assigns  for 
this  forbearance  is  that  others  might  not  be  led  to  think  of 
him  too  highly.  He  did  not  wish  to  be  judged  of  by  what 
he  said  of  himself  or  of  his  experiences.  He  preferred  that 
men  should  judge  of  him  by  w^hat  they  saw  or  heard. 

7.  And  lest  I  should  be  exalted  above  measure 
through  the  abundance  of  the  revelations,  there  was 
given  to  me  a  thorn  in  the  flesh,  the  messenger  of 
Satan  to  buffet  me,  lest  I  should  be  exalted  above 
measure. 

As  Paul  determined  not  to  give  occasion  to  others  to 
think  too  highly  of  him,  he  here  tells  us  that  God  provided 
against  his  being  unduly  elated  even  in  his  own  mind.  It  is  a 
familiar  matter  of  experience  that  men  are  as  much  exalted 
in  their  own  estimation  by  the  distinguishing  favour  of  their 
superiors,  as  by  the  possession  of  personal  advantages.  There- 
fore the  apostle,  although  he  would  not  boast  of  himself,  was 
still  in  danger  of  being  unduly  elated  by  the  extraordinary 
manifestations  of  the  divine  favour.  The  order  of  the  words 
is  inverted.  "And  by  the  excess  of  revelations  lest  I  should 
be  exalted  above  measure ; "  vTrcpaipw/xai,  be  lifted  up  above 
what  is  meet  or  right.  Tiie  expression  excess,  or  exceeding 
abundance,  of  revelations  seems  to  refer  not  exclusively  to  the 
event  above  mentioned,  but  to  other  similar  communications 
made  to  him  at  other  times.     That  was  not  the  only  occasion 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  7.  28^ 

on  which  God  had  nnveiled  to  the  apostle  the  treasures  of  di- 
vine knowledge.  There  teas  given  to  me^  i.  e.  by  God.  It  was 
God  who  sent  the  trial  here  referred  to,  and  from  God  the 
apostle  sought  deliverance.  A  thorn  in  the  fleshy  a-KoXoxp  rfj 
arafjKL.  The  word  (jkoXoxj/  properly  means  a  sharpened  stake,  a 
palisade,  then  any  piece  of  sharpened  wood,  and  specifically  a 
thorn.  This  last  is  the  meaning  best  suited  to  tliis  passage, 
and  is  the  one  commonly  adopted.  Others  say  the  meaning 
is,  "a  goad  for  the  flesh,"  borrowing  a  figure  from  oxen, 
metaphora  a  bobus  sumpta,  as  Calvin  says ;  others  again  un- 
derstand o-KoXdi//  to  refer  to  a  stake  on  which  offenders  were 
impaled,  or  the  cross  on  which  they  were  suspended.  A 
stake,  or  cross,  for  the  flesh,  would  be  a  figurative  expression 
for  bodily  torture.  Flesh  may  be  taken  literally  for  the  body, 
or  figuratively  for  the  corrupt  nature.  Calvin  and  many  oth- 
ers take  the  latter  view.  But  there  is  no  reason  for  departing 
from  the  literal  meaning,  v/hich  should  in  all  cases  be  pre- 
ferred, other  things  being  equal.  The  dative  a-apKi  may  be 
rendered  either,  for  the  flesh,  or  pertaining  to  the  flesh,  i.  e. 
in  the  flesh.  This  last  is  to  be  preferred,  as  it  suits  the  con- 
text and  is  sustained  by  the  parallel  passage.  Gal.  4,  14,  t6v 
TTCtpacr/xov  /xov  rov  iv  rrj  aapKi  fxov.  If  this  is  the  true  interpreta- 
tion of  the  word  o-dp^,  it  goes  far  to  determine  the  nature  of 
the  thorn  of  which  the  apostle  here  speaks.  It  cannot  be  the 
evil  suggestions,  or  fiery  darts  of  Satan,  as  Luther,  Calvin,  and 
others,  understand  it ;  nor  some  prominent  adversary,  as 
many  of  the  ancients  suppose ;  it  was  doubtless  some  painful 
bodily  affection.  A  messenger  of  Satan,  In  the  Bible  the 
idea  is  often  presented  that  bodily  diseases  are  at  times  pro- 
duced by  the  direct  agency  of  Satan,  so  that  they  may  be 
regarded  as  his  messengers,  something  sent  by  him.  The 
word  Sarav  is  used  here  probably  as  an  indeclinable  noun,  as 
in  the  Septuagint  in  one  or  two  places,  but  in  the  Xew  Testa- 
ment it  is  always,  except  in  this  instance,  declined,  nom.  2a- 
Tttvas,  gen.  Sarai/a.  On  this  account  many  are  disposed  to 
take  the  word  here  as  in  the  nominative,  and  translate  the 
phrase  ajigel  Sata?i,  i.  e.  an  angel  (or  messenger)  who  is  Sa- 
tan. But  inasmuch  as  Sarav  is  at  times  indeclinable,  and  as 
Satan  is  never  in  the  Xew  Testament  called  an  angel,  the 
great  majority  of  commentators  give  the  same  exposition  as 
tbat  given  in  the  English  version.  To  buffet  me,  tVa  fxe  Ko\a- 
<t>iCv^  i'^  order  that  he  (i.  e.  the  angel  or  messenger)  may  buffet 
me.    The  use  of  the  present  tense  seems  to  imply  that  "the 


286  II.    CORINTHIANS   12,  8.9. 

thorn  in  the  flesh "  was  a  permanent  afiection  under  which 
the  apostle  continued  to  suffer.  Lest  I  should  he  exalted 
above  measure.  This  last  clause  expresses  the  design  of  God 
in  permitting  the  apostle  to  be  thus  afflicted.  He  carried 
about  with  him  a  continued  evidence  of  his  weakness.  How- 
ever much  he  was  exalted,  although  raised  to  the  third  heaven, 
he  could  not  extract  this  rankling  thorn.  And  the  experience 
of  God's  people  shows  that  bodily  pain  has  a  special  oflice  to 
perform  in  the  work  of  sanctilication.  In  the  unrenewed  its 
tendency  is  to  exasperate ;  when  self-inflicted  its  tendency  is 
to  debase  and  fill  the  soul  with  grovelling  ideas  of  God  and 
religion,  and  with  low  self-conceit.  But  when  inflicted  by  God 
on  his  own  children,  it  more  than  any  thing  teaches  them  their 
weakness  and  dependence,  and  calls  upon  them  to  submit 
when  submission  is  most  difficult.  Though  he  slay  me,  I  will 
trust  in  him,  is  the  expression  of  the  highest  form  of  faith. 

8.  9.  For  this  thing  I  besought  the  Lord  thrice, 
that  it  might  depart  from  me.  And  he  said  unto  me. 
My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee :  for  my  strength  is 
made  perfect  in  weakness.  Most  gladly  therefore  will 
I  rather  glory  in  my  infirmities,  that  the  power  of 
Christ  may  rest  upon  me. 

For  this  thing ^  virkp  tovtov,  in  reference  to  this  j  vTrip  is 
here  used  in  the  sense  of  Trept.  Tovtov  may  be  neuter,  for  this 
thing,  i.  e.  this  affliction ;  or  masculine  referring  to  ayycAos, 
''  about  this  angel  or  messenger  of  Satan,"  &c.  This  is  gene- 
rally preferred  on  account  of  the  folloAving  clause,  Iva  a-n-va-Ty, 
that  he  might  depart  from  me.  I  besought  the  Lord,  says 
the  apostle,  thrice.  So  our  blessed  Lord  prayed  "  the  third 
time  saying.  Let  this  cup  pass  from  me."  Paul  was  therefore 
importunate  in  his  })etition  for  deliverance  from  this  sore  trial. 
He  says,  I  besought  the  Lord,  that  is,  Christ,  as  is  clear  not 
only  fjom  the  general  usage  of  Scripture,  but  from  what  fol- 
lows in  V.  9,  where  he  speaks  of  the  "  power  of  Christ."  And 
lie  said  unto  me,  ctpr/Kc  ixol.  The  perfect  is  used  either  for  the 
aorist,  oi-  in  its  proper  force  connecting  the  past  with  the 
present.  Tiie  answer  was  not  simply  something  past,  but 
something  which  continued  in  its  consoling  power.  Winer, 
§  41.  "He  has  said  ;"  the  answer  was  ever  sounding  in  the 
apostle's  ears,  and  not  in  his  ears  only,  but  in  those  of  all  hia 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  8.9.  287 

suffering  people  from  that  day  to  this.  Each  hears  the  Lord 
say,  My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee^  dpKct  o-ot  17  x^P^^  ^ov. 
These  words  should  be  engraven  on  the  palm  of  every  believ- 
er's hand.  My  grace^  either,  *my  love,'  or  raetonymically, 
'  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit,'  which  is  so  often  meant  by  the 
word  grace.  The  connection  is  in  favour  of  the  common  mean- 
ing of  the  term.  '  My  love  is  enough  for  thee.'  These  are  the 
words  of  Christ.  He  says,  to  those  who  seek  deliverance  from 
pain  and  sorrow,  '  It  is  enough  that  I  love  you.'  This  secures 
and  implies  all  other  good.  His  favour  is  Hfe ;  his  loving- 
kindness  is  better  than  life.  For  my  strength  is  perfected  in 
weakness.  This  is  given  as  the  reason  why  the  grace  or  fa- 
vour of  Christ  is  all-sufficient.  That  reason  is,  that  his 
strength  is  perfected,  i.  e.  clearly  revealed  as  accomplishing 
its  end,  in  weakness.  '  Weakness,  in  other  words,  says  our 
Lord,  is  the  condition  of  my  manifesting  my  strength.  The 
weaker  my  people  are,  the  more  conspicuous  is  my  strength 
in  sustaining  and  delivering  them.*  Most  gladly  therefore 
will  I  rather  glory  in  my  infirm,ities.  The  sense  is  not,  '  I 
will  glory  in  infirmities  rather  than  in  other  things,'  as  though 
Paul  had  written  fx-aXkov  kv  rats  ao-^evctais,  but,  '  I  will  rather 
glory  in  infirmities  than  seek  deliverance.'  If  Paul's  suflfer- 
ings  were  to  be  the  occasion  of  the  manifestation  of  Christ's 
glory,  he  rejoiced  in  suffering.  This  he  did  -qSia-Ta,  most 
sweetly^  with  an  acquiescence  delightful  to  himself.  His  suf- 
ferings thus  became  the  source  of  the  purest  and  highest 
pleasure.  Kavxao/xat  ci'  rats  oo-'^cvetats  does  not  mean  X  glory 
in  the  m,idst  of  infirmities^  but  on  account  of  them.  See  5, 
12.  10,  15.  Rom.  2,  23,  &c.,  &c.  This  rejoicing  on  account 
of  his  sufferings,  or  those  things  which  implied  his  weakness 
and  dependence,  was  not  a  fanatical  feeling,  it  had  a  rational 
and  sufficient  basis,  viz.,  that  the  power  of  Christ  may  rest 
upon  me.  The  word  is  iTna-K-qvoicrrj^  m,ay  pitch  its  tent  upon 
me  /  i.  e.  dwell  in  me  as  in  a  tent,  as  the  shechinah  dwelt  of 
old  in  the  tabernacle.  To  be  made  thus  the  dwelling-place 
of  the  power  of  Christ,  where  he  reveals  his  glory,  was  a  ra- 
tional ground  of  rejoicing  in  those  infirmities  which  were  the 
condition  of  his  presence  and  the  occasion  for  the  manifesta- 
tion of  his  power.  Most  Christians  are  satisfied  in  trying  to 
be  resigned  under  suffering.  They  think  it  ^  great  thing  if 
they  can  bring  themselves  to  submit  to  be  the  dwelling-place 
of  Christ's  power.  To  rejoice  in  their  afflictions  because 
thereby  Christ  is  glorified,  is  more  than  they  aspire  to.    Paul's 


288  II.    CORIXTHIANS    12,  10. 

experience  was  far  above  that  standard.  The  power  of  Christ 
is  not  only  thus  manifested  in  the  weakness  of  his  people,  but 
in  the  means  which  he  employs  for  the  accomplishment  of  his 
purposes.  These  are  in  all  cases  in  themselves  utterly  inade- 
quate and  disproportionate  to  the  results  to  be  obtained.  The 
treasure  is  in  earthly  vessels  that  the  excellency  of  the  power 
may  be  of  God.  By  the  foolishness  of  preaching  he  saves 
those  who  believe.  By  twelve  illiterate  men  the  church  was 
established  and  extended  over  the  civilized  world.  By  a  few 
missionaries  heathen  lands  are  converted  into  Christian  coun- 
tries. So  in  all  cases,  the  power  of  Christ  is  perfected  in 
weakness.  We  have  in  this  passage  a  clear  exhibition  of  the 
religious  life  of  the  apostle,  and  the  most  convincing  proof 
that  he  lived  in  communion  with  Christ  as  God.  To  him  he 
looked  as  to  his  supreme,  omnipresent,  all-sufficient  Lord  for 
deliverance  from  "  the  thorn  in  the  flesh,"  from  the  buffetings 
of  the  messenger  of  Satan,  under  which  he  had  so  grievously 
suffered.  To  him  he  prayed.  From  him  he  received  the  an- 
swer to  his  prayer.  That  answer  was  the  answer  of  God ;  it 
implies  divine  perfection  in  him  who  gave  it.  To  what  suffer- 
er Avould  the  favour  of  a  creature  be  sufficient  ?  Who  but 
God  can  say,  "  My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee  ?  "  To  Paul  it 
was  sufficient.  It  gave  him  perfect  peace.  It  not  only  made 
him  resigned  under  his  afflictions,  but  enabled  him  to  rejoice 
in  them.  That  Christ  should  be  glorified  was  to  him  an  end 
for  which  any  human  being  might  feel  it  an  honour  to  suffer. 
It  is  therefore  most  evident  that  the  piety  of  the  apostle,  his 
inward  spiritual  life,  had  Christ  for  its  object.  It  was  on  him 
his  religious  affections  terminated  ;  to  him  the  homage  of  his 
supreme  love,  confidence  and  devotion  was  rendered.  Chris- 
tianity is  not  merely  the  religion  which  Christ  taught ;  but  it 
is,  subjectively  considered,  the  religion  of  which  Christ  is  the 
source  and  the  object. 

10.  Therefore  I  take  pleasure  in  infirmities,  in  re- 
proaches, in  necessities,  in  persecutions,  in  distresses 
for  Christ's  sake :  for  when  I  am  weak,  then  am  I 
strong. 

The  difference  between  glorying  in  infirmities  and  taking 
pleas  \re  in  them,  is  that  the  former  phrase  expresses  the  out- 
ward  manifestation  of  the  feeling  expressed  by  the  latter. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  11.  289 

He  gloried  in  infirmities  when  he  boasted  of  them,  that  is,  re- 
ferred to  them  as  things  which  reflected  honour  on  him  and 
were  to  him  a  source  of  joy.  As  they  were  thus  the  occa- 
sions of  manifesting  the  power  of  Christ,  Paul  was  pleased 
with  them  and  was  glad  that  he  was  subjected  to  them.  In- 
firmities  is  a  general  term,  including  every  thing  in  our  condi- 
tion, whether  moral  or  physical,  which  is  an  evidence  or 
manifestation  of  weakness.  From  the  context  it  is  plain  that 
the  reference  is  here  to  sufferings,  of  which  reproaches,  neces- 
sities, persecutions  and  distresses  were  different  forms.  For 
GhrisVs  sake.  These  words  belong  to  all  the  preceding, 
terms.  It  was  in  the  sufferings,  whether  reproaches,  necessi- 
ties, persecutions  or  distresses,  endured  for  Christ's  sake,  that 
the  apostle  took  pleasure.  Not  in  suffering  in  itself  consid- 
ered, not  in  self-inflicted  sufferings,  nor  in  those  which  were 
the  consequences  of  his  own  folly  or  evil  dispositions,  but  in 
sufferings  endured  for  Christ's  sake,  or  considered  as  the  con- 
dition of  the  manifestation  of  his  power.  For  when  I  am 
weak^  then  am  I  strong.  When  really  weak  in  ourselves,  and 
conscious  of  that  weakness,  we  are  in  the  state  suited  to  the 
manifestation  of  the  power  of  God.  When  emptied  of  our- 
selves we  are  filled  with  God.  Those  who  think  they  can 
change  their  own  hearts,  atone  for  their  own  sins,  subdue  the 
power  of  evil  in  their  own  souls  or  in  the  souls  of  others,  who 
feel  able  to  sustain  themselves  under  afiiiction,  God  leaves  to 
their  own  resources.  But  when  they  feel  and  acknowledge 
their  weakness  he  communicates  to  them  divine  strength. 

11.  I  am  become  a  fool  in  glorying ;  ye  hav^om- 
pelled  me :  for  I  ought  to  have  been  commended  of 
you :  for  in  nothing  am  I  behind  the  very  chiefest 
apostles,  though  I  be  nothing. 

I  am,  become  a  fool^  &c.  This  some  understand  as  ironi- 
cally said,  because  the  self-vindication  contained  in  what  pre- 
cedes was  not  an  act  of  folly,  although  it  might  be  so  regarded 
by  Paul's  opposers.  It  is  more  natural,  and  more  in  keeping 
with  the  whole  context,  to  imderstand  the  words  as  express- 
ing the  apostle's  own  feelings.  Self-laudation  is  folly.  It  was 
derogatory  to  the  apostle's  dignity,  and  painful  to  his  feelings, 
but  he  was  forced  to  submit  to  it.  And,  therefore,  in  his  case 
and  under  the  circumstances,  although  humiliating,  it  was 


290  II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  12. 

right.  Te  have  compelled  me.  It  was  their  conduct  which 
made  it  necessary  for  the  apost\e  to  commend  himself.  Thia 
is  explained  in  the  following  clause.  For  I  ought  to  have  been 
commended  of  you.  If  they  had  done  their  duty  in  vindicat- 
ing liim  from  the  aspersions  of  the  false  teachers,  there  would 
have  been  no  necessity  for  him  to  vindicate  himself.  They 
were  bound  thus  to  vindicate  him,  for  in  nothing  icas  he  be- 
hind the  very  chief  est  apostles.  It  is  an  imperative  duty  rest- 
ing on  all  who  have  the  opportunity  to  vindicate  the  righteous. 
For  us  to  sit  silent  when  aspersions  are  cast  upon  good  men, 
or  when  their  character  and  services  are  undervalued,  is  to 
make  ourselves  partakers  of  the  guilt  of  detraction.  The 
Corinthians  were  thus  guilty  under  aggravating  circum- 
stances ;  because  the  evidences  of  Paul's  apostleship  and  of 
his  fidelity  were  abundant.  He  came  behind  in  no  one  re- 
spect the  very  chief  of  the  apostles.  Besides  this  they  were 
not  only  the  witnesses  of  the  signs  of  his  divine  mission,  but 
they  were  the  recipients  of  the  blessings  of  that  mission.  For 
them  therefore  to  fail  to  vindicate  his  claims  and  services  was 
an  ungrateful  and  cowardly  dereliction  of  duty.  By  the  chief 
of  the  apostles,  still  more  clearly  here  than  in  11,  5,  are  to  be 
understood  the  most  prominent  among  the  true  apostles,  as 
Peter,  James,  and  John,  who  in  Gal.  2,  9  are  called  pillars. 
Neither  here  nor  in  11,  5  is  it  an  ironical  designation  of  the 
false  teachers.  Though  I  be  nothing.  The  apostle  felt  that 
what  was  the  efiect  of  the  grace,  or  free  gift  of  God,  was  no 
ground  of  self-complacency  or  self-exaltation.  1  Cor.  4,  7.  15, 
8-10.  There  were  therefore  united  in  him  a  deep  sense  of 
his  own  unworthiness  and  impotence,  with  the  conviction  and 
consciousness  of  being  full  of  knowledge,  grace  and  power,  by 
the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

12.  Truly  the  signs  of  an  apostle  were  wrought 
among  you  in  all  patience,  in  signs,  and  wonders,  and 
mighty  deeds. 

This  is  the  proof  that  he  did  not  come  behind  the  chief 
apostles.  Truly;  /xcV,  to  which  no  8e  answers.  The  opposi- 
tion is  plain  from  the  connection.  '  The  signs  indeed  of  an 
apostle  were  wrought  among  you,  but  you  did  not  acknowl- 
edge them.'  So  Kuckert,  De  Wette,  and  others.  The  signs 
of  an  apostle  were  the  iDsignia  of  the  apostleship;    thos<j 


II.   CORINTHIANS    12,  12.  291 

things  which  by  divine  appointment  ^veve  made  the  evidence 
of  a  7nission  from  God.  When  these  were  j^resent  an  obliga- 
tion rested  on  all  who  witnessed  them  to  acknowledge  the 
authority  of  those  who  bore  those  insignia.  When  they  were 
absent,  it  was,  on  the  one  hand,  an  act  of  sacrilege  to  claim 
the  apostleship ;  and,  on  the  other,  an  act  of  apostacy  from 
God  to  admit  its  possession.  To  acknowledge  the  claims  of 
those  who  said  they  were  apostles  and  were  not,  was  (and  is) 
to  turn  from  God  to  the  creature,  to  receive  as  divine  what 
was  in  fact  human  or  Satanic.  This  is  evidently  Paul's  view 
of  the  matter,  as  appears  from  11,  13-15,  where  he  speaks  of 
those  who  were  the  ministers  of  Satan  and  yet  claimed  to  be 
the  apostles  of  Christ.  Comp.  Rev.  2,  2.  These  signs  of  an 
apostle,  as  we  learn  from  Scripture,  were  of  different  kinds. 
Some  consisted  in  the  manifestations  of  the  inward  gifts  of  the 
apostleship  (i.  e.  of  those  gifts  the  possession  of  which  consti- 
tuted a  man  an  apostle) ;  such  as  plenary  knowledge  of  the 
gospel  derived  by  immediate  revelation  from  Jesus  Christ, 
Gal.  1,  12.  1  Cor.  15,  3;  inspiration,  or  that  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  which  rendered  its  possessor  infallible  in  the  com- 
munication of  the  truth,  1  Cor.  2,  10-13.  12,  8,  in  connection 
with  12,  29  and  14,  37.  Others  of  these  signs  consisted  in  the 
external  manifestations  of  God's  favour  sanctioning  the  claim 
to  the  apostleship.  Gal.  2,  8.  To  this  class  belongs  fidelity  iu 
teaching  the  truth,  or  conformity  to  the  authenticated  stand- 
ard of  faith,  Gal.  1,  8.  9.  Unless  a  man  was  thus  kept  faithful 
to  the  gospel,  no  matter  what  other  evidence  of  being  an 
apostle  he  might  be  able  to  adduce,  he  was  to  be  regarded  as 
accursed.  Gal.  1,  8.  To  this  class  also  belong,  success  in 
preaching  the  gospel,  1  Cor.  9,  2.  2  Cor.  3,  2.  3  ;  the  power 
of  communicating  the  Holy  Ghost  by  the  imposition  of  hands, 
Acts  8,  18.  19,  6  ;  the  power  of  working  miracles,  as  appears 
from  the  passage  under  consideration,  from  Rom.  15,  18.  19, 
and  many  other  passages,  as  Heb.  2,  4.  Mark  14,  20.  Acts  5, 
12.  14,  3 ;  and  a  holy  walk  and  conversation,  2  Cor.  6,  4. 
Without  these  signs  no  man  can  be  recognized  and  obeyed  as 
an  apostle  without  apostacy  from  God ;  without  turning  from 
the  true  apostles  to  those  who  are  the  ministers  of  Satan. 
Jn  all  patience,  or  constancy.  This  does  not  mean  that  the 
patient  endurance  of  severe  trials  Avas  one  of  the  signs  of  his 
apostleship,  but  that  those  signs  were  wrought  out  under  ad- 
verse circumstances  requiring  the  exercise  of  the  greatest 
constancy.    In  signs,  and  wonders,  a7id  mighty  deeds.    These 


292  II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  13.  14. 

are  different  designations  for  the  same  thing.  Miracles  aro 
called  signs  in  reference  to  their  design,  which  is  to  confirm 
the  divine  mission  of  those  who  perform  them ;  wonders  be- 
cause of  the  effect  w^hich  they  produced ;  and  mighty  deeds 
(Sui/a/Aet?)  because  they  are  manifestations  of  divine  power. 

13.  Eor  what  is  it  wherein  ye  were  inferior  to  oth- 
er churches,  except  (it  be)  that  I  myself  was  not  bur- 
densome to  you  ?  forgive  me  this  wrong. 

For.  The  connection  indicated  by  this  particle  is  with 
the  assertion  in  v.  1 2.  'I  am  not  inferior  to  the  chief  apostles, 
for  you  are  not  behind  other  churches.'  The  fact  that  the 
churches  founded  by  Paul  were  as  numerous,  as  well  furnished 
with  gifts  and  graces,  as  those  founded  by  the  other  apostles, 
was  a  proof  that  he  was  their  equal.  In  other  words,  as  it  is 
said  Gal.  2,  8,  "  Pie  that  wrought  effetttually  in  Peter  to  the 
apostleship  of  the  circumcision,  the  same  was  mighty  in  me 
towards  the  gentiles."  Conip.  1  Cor.  1,  5-7.  Were  ye  infe- 
rior to  other  churches^  literally,  less,  or  weaker  than.  The 
verb  rjTTaofxaL  (from  -^TToiv,  less)  has  a  comparative  sense,  and 
therefore  is  followed  hj  v-n-ep^  beyond ;  Sveak  beyond  other 
churches.'  The  only  distinction  to  the  disadvantage  of  the 
Corinthians  was,  that  the  apostle  had  refused  to  accept  aid 
from  them.  This  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  a  sarcasm,  or  as  a 
reproach.  It  was  said  in  a  tone  of  tenderness,  as  is  plain  from 
what  follows.  Forgive  me  this  wrong.  It  was,  apparently,  a 
reflection  on  the  Corinthians ;  it  seemed  to  imply  a  want  of 
confidence  in  their  liberality  or  love,  that  Paul  refused  to 
receive  from  them  what  he  willingly  received  from  other 
churches.  In  the  preceding  chapter  he  endeavoured  to  con- 
vince them  that  his  doing  so  was  no  proof  of  his  want  of  affec- 
tion to  them,  or  of  his  want  of  confidence  in  their  love  to  him. 
His  conduct  in  this  matter  had  other  and  sufficient  reasons, 
reasons  which  constrained  him  to  persist  in  this  course  of  con- 
duct, however  painful  to  him  and  to  them. 

14.  Behold,  the  third  time  I  am  ready  to  come  to 
you ;  and  I  will  not  be  burdensome  to  you  :  for  I  seek 
not  yours,  but  you.  For  the  children  ought  not  to  lay 
up  for  the  parents,  but  the  parents  for  the  children. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  15.16.  293 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  mention  but  one  visit  of  Paul  to 
Oorinth  prior  to  the  date  of  this  epistle.  From  this  passage, 
as  well  as  from  2,  1  and  13,  1.  2,  it  is  plain  that  he  had  already 
been  twice  in  that  city.  The  words,  therefore,  the  third  time, 
in  this  verse,  belong  to  the  word  cotne^  and  not  to  I  am  ready. 
The  sense  is  not,  '  I  am  the  third  time  ready,'  but,  '  I  am 
ready  to  come  the  third  time.'  His  purpose  was  to  act  on 
this  third  visit  on  the  same  principle  which  had  controlled  his 
conduct  on  the  two  preceding  occasions.  I  will  not  be  bur- 
densome  to  you^  I  will  receive  nothing  from  you.  For  this  he 
gives  two  reasons,  both  not  only  consistent  with  his  love  for 
them,  but  proofs  of  his  love.  For  I  seek  not  yours^  but  you. 
This  is  the  first  reason.  He  had  no  mercenary  or  selfish  ends 
to  accomplish.  It  was  not  their  money,  but  their  souls  he 
desired  to  win.  For  the  children  ought  not  to  lay  up  for  the 
parents^  but  the  parents  for  the  children.  This  was  the  second 
reason.  He  stood  to  them  in  the  relation  of  a  parent.  In  the 
course  of  nature,  it  was  the  parent's  office  to  provide  for  the 
children,  and  not  the  children  for  the  parent.  You  must  al- 
low me,  says  Paul,  a  parent's  privilege.  Thus  gracefully  and 
tenderly  does  the  apostle  reconcile  a  seemingly  ungracious  act 
with  the  kind  feelings  which  he  cherished  in  himself  and  de- 
sired to  excite  in  them. 

15.  And  I  will  very  gladly  spend  and  be  spent  for 
you ;  though  the  more  abundantly  I  love  you,  the  less 
I  be  loved. 

As  I  am  your  father,  I  will  gladly  act  as  such,  spend  and 
be  spent  for  you ;  even  though  I  forfeit  your  love  by  acting 
in  a  way  which  love  forces  me  to  act.  This  is  the  strongest 
expression  of  disinterested  affection.  Paul  was  willing  not 
only  to  give  his  property  but  himself,  his  life  and  strength, 
for  them  (literally,  for  your  souls,  virip  ruiv  vj/vxoiv  v/xwv),  not 
only  without  a  recompense,  but  at  the  cost  of  their  love. 

16.  But  be  it  so,  I  did  not  burden  you  :  neverthe- 
less, being  crafty,  I  caught  you  with  guile. 

J5e  it  so  ;  that  is,  admitted  that  I  did  not  personally  bur 
den  you,  yet  (you  may  say)  I  craftily  did  it  through  others. 
This  was  designed  to  meet  the  ungenerous  objection  which 


294  II.   CORINTHIAXS    12,  17-19. 

the  false  teachers  might  be  disj^osed  to  make.  They  might 
insinuate  that  although  he  refused  to  receive  any  thing  him. 
self,  he  quartered  his  friends  upon  them,  or  spoiled  them 
through  others.  I  caught  you  with  guile^  SdA-cp  v^m.^  l\a.^Qv^ 
i.  e.  I  despoiled  you  by  artifice,  as  an  animal  is  taken  by  being 
deceived.  This  shows  the  character  of  the  opponents  of  the 
apostle  in  Corinth.  That  he  should  think  it  necessary  to 
guard  against  insinuations  so  ungenerous  and  so  unfounded, 
is  proof  of  his  wisdom  in  refusing  to  give  such  antagonists  the 
least  occasion  to  question  the  purity  of  his  motives. 

17.  18.  Did  I  make  a  gain  of  you  by  any  of  them 
whom  I  sent  mito  you?  I  desired  Titus,  and  with 
(him)  I  sent  a  brother.  Did  Titus  make  a  gain  of 
you  ?  walked  we  not  in  the  same  spirit  ?  (walked  we) 
not  in  the  same  steps  ? 

The  best  refutation  of  the  insinuation  that  Paul  did  in  an 
underhand  way  by  others  what  he  refused  to  do  openly  and 
in  his  own  person,  was  an  appeal  to  facts.  The  Corinthians 
knew  the  charge  to  be  unfounded.  They  knew  that  no  one 
of  those  whom  Paul  had  sent  to  Corinth  received  any  com- 
pensation at  their  hands.  This  was  specially  true  in  the  case 
of  Titus,  his  immediate  representative.  All  his  messengers 
followed  the  example,  and  doubtless  the  injunctions  of  Paul, 
in  bearing  their  own  expenses.  The  mission  of  Titus  to  Cor- 
inth here  referred  to,  is  not  that  mentioned  in  chap.  8,  which 
was  not  yet  accomplished,  but  that  mentioned  in  chap.  7,  de- 
signed to  ascertain  the  effect  produced  by  Paul's  previous 
letter.  In  the  same  spirit  ^  either  the  same  inward  disposi- 
tion of  mind,  or  with  the  same  Holy  Spirit,  i.  e.  imbued  and 
guided  by  the  same  divine  agent,  who  controls  the  conduct 
of  the  people  of  God.  In  the  same  steps.  Paul  and  his  mes- 
sengers walked  in  the  same  footsteps.  That  is,  they  all  fol- 
lowed Christ,  whose  steps  mark  the  way  in  which  his  followers 
are  to  tread. 

19.  Again,  think  ye  that  we  excuse  ourselves  unto 
you  ?  we  speak  before  God  in  Christ :  but  (we  do)  all 
».hings,  dearly  beloved,  h^  your  edifying. 

There  were  two  faiee  impressions  which  the  apostle  hero 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  20.  295 

designs  to  correct.  First,  that  he  felt  himself  accountable  to 
the  Corinthians,  or  that  they  were  the  judges  at  whose  bar  he 
was  defending  himself.  Second,  that  his  object  was  in  any 
respect  personal  or  selfish.  He  sjDoke  before  God,  not  before 
them ;  for  their  edification,  not  for  his  own  reputation. 

Again  think  ye.  Do  you  again  think,  as  you  have  thought 
before.  Instead  of  TraAtv,  again^  the  MSS.  D,  E,  J,  K  road 
iraXat^  formerly^  long.  This  reading  is  adopted  by  the  majori- 
ty of  modern  editors.  The  sense  then  is,  '  Ye  are  long  of  the 
opinion,'  or,  '  Ye  have  long  thought.'  Comp.  d  TraAai  liriSa- 
v€v,  whether  he  had  been  long  dead,  in  Mark  15,  44.  The 
common  reading  has  so  much  MSS.  authority  in  its  favour, 
and  it  gives  so  good  a  sense,  that  it  is  generally  by  the  older 
editors  and  commentators  retained.  With  TraAtv  the  passage 
is  best  read  interrogatively.  Do  ye  again  think  ?  as  they  had 
before  done.  See  3,  1.  5,  12.  They  were  too  much  disposed 
to  think  that  the  apostle,  like  the  false  teachers,  was  anxious 
to  commend  himself  to  their  favour,  and  to  appeal  to  them  as 
his  judges.  He  on  more  occasions  than  one  gives  them  to 
understand  that  he  was  not  under  their  authority,  his  office 
was  not  received  from  their  hands,  and  he  was  not  accounta- 
ble to  them  for  the  manner  in  which  he  exercised  it.  See 
1  Cor.  4,  3.  Excuse  ourselves  unto  you ;  v/juv,  before  you  as 
judges.  Mccuse.,  dTroAoyeo/xat,  to  talk  oneself  off^  to  jylead^  or 
answer  for  oneself.  This  was  not  the  position  which  the 
apostle  occupied.  He  was  not  an  offender,  real  or  supposed, 
arraigned  at  their  bar.  On  the  contrary,  as  he  says,  we  speak 
before  God ;  i.  e.  as  responsible  to  him,  and  as  in  his  presence ; 
in  Christ.,  i.  e.  as  it  becomes  one  conscious  of  his  union  with 
the  Lord  Jesus.  In  all  his  self-vindication  he  considers  liim- 
self  as  a  Christian  speaking  in  the  presence  of  God,  to  whom 
alone  he  was,  as  a  divinely  commissioned  messenger,  answera- 
ble for  what  he  said.  All  things,  dearly  beloved,  for  your 
edification.  This  is  the  second  point.  His  apology,  or  self- 
vindication,  had  their  good,  not  his  reputation  or  advantage, 
for  its  object. 

20.  For  I  fear,  lest,  when  I  come,  I  shall  not  find 
you  such  as  1  would,  and  (that)  I  shall  be  found  unto 
you  such  as  ye  would  not :  lest  (there  be)  debates,  en- 
vy ings,  wraths,  strifes,  backbitings,  whisperings,  swell- 
ings, tumults. 

13* 


296  II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  21. 

He  aimed  at  their  edification,  for  he  feared  their  state  was 
not  what  he  could  desire.  He  feartd  lest  they  would  not  be 
acceptable  to  him,  nor  he  to  them.  What  he  feared  was  that 
the  evils  to  which  frequent  reference  had  already  been  made, 
should  be  found  still  to  exist.  Those  evils  w^ere,  €,oet9,  conten- 
tions^ such  as  existed  between  the  different  factions  into  which 
the  church  was  divided,  some  saying  we  are  of  Paul,  others, 
we  are  of  Cephas,  &c.,  see  1  Cor.  1,  11 ;  envyings^  C^/W,  those 
feelings  of  jealousy  and  alienation  which  generally  attend  con- 
tentions; ^vfjLOL,  outbreaks  of  anger ;  ept^ctat,  cabals.  The 
word  is  from  IpiS^o;^  a  hireling^  and  is  often  used  of  a  factious 
spirit  of  party ;  KaraAaXtat  and  i/zt^vpicr/xoc,  backbiting  and  whis- 
perings, i.  e.  open  detractions  and  secret  calumnies ;  ^uo-twcrcts, 
swellings^  i.  e.  manifestations  of  pride  and  insolence ;  aKaracr- 
Tttcrittt,  twnults^  i.  e.  those  disorders  which  necessarily  follow 
the  state  of  things  above  described.  This  is  a  formidable  list 
of  evils,  and  it  seems  hard  to  reconcile  what  is  here  said  with 
the  glowing  description  of  the  repentance  and  obedience  of 
the  church  found  in  the  preceding  part  of  this  epistle,  espe- 
cially in  chapter  1.  To  account  for  this  discrepancy  some 
suppose,  as  before  mentioned,  that  the  latter  part  of  this  epis- 
tle, from  ch.  10  to  the  end,  formed  a  distinct  letter  written  at 
a  different  time  and  under  different  circumstances  from  those 
under  which  the  former  part  Avas  written.  Others,  admitting 
that  the  two  portions  are  one  and  the  same  epistle  sent  at  the 
«ame  time,  still  assume  that  a  considerable  interval  of  time 
olapsed  between  the  writing  of  the  former  and  latter  parts  of 
the  letter;  and  that  during  that  interval  intelUgence  had 
reached  the  apostle  that  the  evils  prevailing  in  the  church  had 
not  been  so  thoroughly  corrected  as  he  had  hoped.  The 
common  and  sufficient  explanation  of  the  difficulty  is,  that 
part  of  the  congregation,  probably  the  majority,  were  penitent 
and  obedient,  while  another  part  were  just  the  opposite. 
When  the  apostle  had  the  one  class  in  view  he  used  the  lan- 
guage of  commendation ;  when  the  other,  the  language  of 
censure.  Examples  of  this  kind  are  abundant  in  his  epistles. 
The  first  part  of  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  is  full  of 
the  strongest  expressions  of  praise,  but  in  what  follows  severe 
r(q)roof  fills  most  of  its  pages. 

21.  (And)  lest,  when  I  come  again,  my  God  will 
humble  me  among  you,  and  (that)  I  shall  bewail  many 


II.   CORINTHIANS   12,  21.  297 

whicli  have  sinned  already,  and  have  not  repented  of 
the  uncleanness,  and  fornication,  and  lasciviousness, 
which  they  have  committed. 

The  same  apprehension  expressed  under  a  different  form. 
The  word  again  may  belong  to  coming^  "me  coming  a2:ain ;" 
or  with  will  humble^  "  God  will  humble  me  again."  This  im- 
plies that  during  his  second  unrecorded  visit,  Paul  was  humbled 
by  what  he  saw  in  Corinth,  and  grieved,  as  he  says,  2,  1,  in 
having  to  use  severity  in  suppressing  prevalent  disorders.  He 
feared  lest  his  third  should  prove  like  that  painful  second 
visit.  The  more  obvious  and  natural  connection,  how^ever,  of 
irakiv  is  with  cA-^di/ra,  as  in  our  version.  '  Lest  God  will  hum- 
ble me  when  I  come  again.'  Nothing  filled  the  apostles  with 
greater  delight  than  to  see  the  churches  of  their  care  stead- 
fast in  faith  and  in  obedience  to  the  truth ;  and  nothing  so 
pained  and  humbled  them  as  the  departure  of  their  disciples 
from  the  paths  of  truth  and  hohness.  Humble  me  among 
you  /  TT/aos  t»/xtt9,  m  relation  to  you. 

And  that  I  shall  bewail^  Trev^rjo-o).  The  word  Trev^eco  is 
here  used  transitively ;  to  mourn  any  one,  to  grieve  for  him. 
Many  suppose  that  the  sorrow  here  intended  was  that  which 
arises  from  the  necessity  of  punishing ;  so  that  the  idea  really 
intended  is,  '  I  fear  I  shall  have  to  discipline  (or  excommuni- 
cate) some,  &c.'  But  this,  to  say  the  least,  is  not  necessary. 
All  that  the  words  or  context  requires  is,  that  Paul  dreaded 
having  to  mourn  over  many  impenitent  members  of  the 
church.  Many  ichich  have  sinned  already  and  have  not  re- 
pented., iroWovs  T(i)v  Trporj/xapTT^KOTOiv  Koi  /xt]  fjieTavorjcrdvTOiv^  many 
of  those  who  having  sbmed  shall  not  have  repented.  The  Trpo 
in  TTporjfiapTrjKOTiDv  is  probably  not  to  be  pressed,  so  as  to  make 
the  word  refer  to  those  who  had  sinned  be/ore  some  specific 
time, — as  their  profession  of  Christianity,  or  Paul's  previous 
visit.  The  force  of  the  preposition  is  sufficiently  expressed  by 
the  word  hereto/ore.  'Those  who  have  heretofore  sinned.' 
What  Paul  feared,  was,  that  when  he  got  to  Corinth  he  should 
find  that  many  of  those  who  had  sinned,  had  not  joined  in  the 
repentance  for  which  he  commended  the  congregation  as  a 
whole.  Of  the  uncleanness,  c£'c.,  lohich  they  committed.  Ac- 
cording to  Meyer,  lirl  rrj  dKa^apata,  k.t.X.,  are  to  be  connected 
with  Trej/^T^cro),  '  I  shall  lament  many  on  account  of  the  unclean- 
ness, &c.'  The  position  of  the  words  is  evidently  in  favour 
of  the  common  construction.     '  Who  have  not  repented  ecu- 


298  II.   CORINTHIANS   13. 

cerning  the  uncleanness  they  have  committed.'  The  classea 
of  sins  most  prevalent  in  Corinth  were  those  referred  to  in  v, 
20,  arising  out  of  the  collisions  of  the  different  classes  or  par- 
ties in  the  church ;  and  those  here  mentioned,  arising  out  of 
the  corruptions  of  the  age  and  of  the  community.  To  mar^e 
a  holy  church  out  of  heathen,  and  in  the  midst  of  heathenism, 
was  impossible  to  any  but  an  almighty  arm.  And  we  know 
that  in  the  work  of  sanctification  of  the  individual  or  of  a 
community,  even  Omnipotence  works  gradually.  The  early 
Christians  were  babes  in  Christ,  much  like  the  converts  from 
among  the  heathen  in  modem  times. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


Threatening  of  punishment  to  impenitent  offenders ;  exhortation  to  sclf-e» 
amination  and  amendment ;  conclusion  of  the  epistle. 

PauVs  warnings  and  exhortations. 

Having  previously  admonished  and  warned,  he  now  distinctly 
announces  his  purpose  to  exercise  his  apostolic  power  in  the 
punishment  of  offenders,  vs.  1.2.  As  they  sought  evidence 
of  his  apostleship,  he  would  show  that  although  weak  in  him- 
self, he  was  invested  with  supernatural  power  by  Christ.  As 
Christ  appeared  as  weak  in  dying,  but  was  none  the  less  im 
bued  with  divine  power,  as  was  proved  by  his  resurrection 
from  the  dead ;  so  the  apostle  in  one  sense  was  weak,  in  an- 
other full  of  power,  vs.  3.  4.  Instead  of  exposing  themselves 
to  this  exercise  of  judicial  authority,  he  exhorts  them  to  try 
themselves,  since  Christ  lived  in  them  unless  they  were  repro- 
bates, V.  5.  He  trusted  that  they  would  acknowledge  him  as 
an  apostle,  as  he  sought  their  good,  vs.  6.  V.  His  power  was 
given,  and  could  be  exercised,  only  for  the  truth.  He  re- 
joiced in  his  own  weakness  and  in  the  prosperity  of  the  Co- 
rinthians. The  object  in  thus  warning  them  was  to  avoid  the 
necessity  of  exercising  the  power  of  judgment  with  which 
Christ  had  invested  him,  vs.  8-10.  Concluding  exhortation 
and  benediction,  vs.  11-13. 


II.   CORINTHIANS    13,  1.  299 

1.  This  is  the  third  (time)  I  am  coming  to  jou  : 
In  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  shall  every 
word  be  established. 

From  this  it  is  evident  that  Paul  had  ah'eady  been  twice 
in  Corinth.  He  was  about  to  make  his  third  visit.  Those 
who  do  not  admit  that  he  went  to  Corinth  during  the  interval 
between  the  writing  the  first  and  second  epistle,  say  that  all 
that  is  proved  by  this  verse,  is  that  "  on«e  he  had  been  there ; 
a  second  time  he  had  intended  to  come ;  now  the  third  time 
he  was  actually  coming."  Others,  still  more  unnaturally,  say 
he  refers  to  his  presence  by  letter,  as  Beza  explains  it :  Binas 
suas  epistolas  pro  tolidem  profectionibus  recenset.  There  is 
no  necessity  for  departing  from  the  obvious  meaning  of  the 
words.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  do  not  contain  a  full  record 
of  all  the  journeys,  labours  and  sufferings  of  the  apostle.  He 
may  have  visited  Corinth  repeatedly  without  its  coming  with- 
in the  design  of  that  book  to  mention  the  fact.  In  the  mouth 
of  tivo  or  three  icitnesses,  dbc.  It  was  expressly  enjoined  in 
the  Old  Testament  that  no  one  should  be  condemned  unless 
on  the  testimony  of  two  or  three  witnesses.  Num.  35,  30. 
Deut.  17,  6.  19,  15.  In  this  latter  passage,  the  very  words 
used  by  the  apostle  are  to  be  found :  "  One  man  shall  not 
rise  up  against  any  man  for  any  iniquity,  or  for  any  sin,  in  any 
sin  that  he  sinneth ;  at  the  mouth  of  two  witnesses,  or  at  the 
mouth  of  three  witnesses,  shall  the  matter  be  established." 
This  principle  of  justice  was  transferred  by  our  Lord  to  the 
New  Dispensation.  In  his  directions  for  dealing  with  offend- 
ers he  says,  "Take  with  thee  one  or  two  more,  that  in  the 
mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  every  word  shall  be  estab- 
lished," Matt.  18,  16;  see  also  John  8,  17.  Heb.  10,  28.  In 
1  Tim.  5,  19  the  apostle  applies  the  rule  specially  to  the  case 
of  elders :  "  Against  an  elder  receive  not  an  accusation,  but 
before  two  or  three  witnesses."  In  the  judgment  of  God, 
therefore,  it  is  better  that  many  offenders  should  go  unpun- 
ished  through  lack  of  testimony,  than  that  the  security  of 
reputation  and  life  should  be  endangered  by  allowing  a  single 
witness  to  establish  a  charge  against  any  man.  This  principle, 
although  thus  plainly  and  repeatedly  sanctioned  both  in  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments,  is  not  held  sacred  in  civil  courts. 
Even  in  criminal  cases  the  testimony  of  one  witness  is  often 
considered  sufficient  to  establish  the  guilt  of  an  accused  per- 
son, no  matter  how  pure  his  previous  reputation  may  have 


300  II.   CORINTHIANS   13,  2. 

])een.  Paul  here  announces  his  determination  to  adhere,  in 
the  administration  of  discipUne,  strictly  to  the  rule  relating  to 
testimony  laid  down  in  the  Scriptures.  There  are  two  expla- 
nations, however,  given  of  this  passage.  Some  suppose  that 
Vanl  merely  alludes  to  the  prescription  in  the  Law,  and  says 
that  his  three  visits  answers  the  spirit  of  the  divine  injunction 
by  being  equivalent  to  the  testimony  of  three  witnesses.  Trea 
mei  adventus  trium  testimoniorum  loco  erunt,  says  Calvin. 
This  interpretation  is  adopted  by  a  great  many  commentators, 
ancient  and  modern.  But  the  formality  with  which  the  prin- 
ciple is  announced,  the  importance  of  the  principle  itself,  and 
his  own  recognition  of  it  elsewhere,  show  that  he  intended  to 
adhere  to  it  in  Corinth.  Three  visits  are  not  the  testimony 
of  three  witnesses.  Every  xoord^  irav  prjfxa^  every  accusation^ 
a  sense  which,  agreeably  to  the  usage  of  the  corresponding 
Hebrew  word,  the  Greek  word  p^/xa  has  here  in  virtue  of  the 
context,  as  in  Matt.  5,  11.  18,16.  27,14.  Shall  be  estab- 
lished^ i.  e.  legally  and  conclusively  proved. 

2.  I  told  you  before,  and  foretell  you,  as  if  I  were 
present,  the  second  time ;  and  being  absent  now  I 
Avrite  to  them  which  heretofore  have  sinned,  and  to  all 
other,  that,  if  I  come  again,  I  will  not  spare. 

The  meaning  of  this  verse  is  doubtful.  The  words  second 
time  (to  SevVcpov,)  may  be  connected  with  being  present  (u)s 
Trapcji/,)  or  with  I  foretell  (TrpoAcyoj).  If  the  former,  the  sense 
may  be,  "I  foretold  (i.  e.  when  in  Corinth),  and  I  foretell,  as 
tliough  present  the  second  time,  although  yet  absent,  to  those 
who  heretofore  have  sinned,  &c."  If  the  latter  connection  be 
prei'erred,  the  sense  is,  "  I  foretold  you,  and  foretell  you  the 
second  time,  as  if  present,  although  now  absent,  <fcc."  This 
is  not  consistent  with  the  natural  order  of  the  words.  Assum- 
ing Paul  to  have  been  already  twice  in  Corinth,  the  simplest 
explanation  of  this  verse  is  that  given  by  Calvin,  Meyer, 
Riickert,  and  others,  "I  have  said  before,  and  say  before,  as 
when  present  the  second  time,  so  now  when  absent,  to  those 
who  have  sinned,  I  will  not  spare."  Paul  gives  now  when 
absent  the  same  warning  that  he  gave  during  his  second  visit. 
The  words  TrpoctVov  and  irpoXiyui  are  combined  htMc  as  in  Gal. 
5,21  and  1  Thess.  3,4.  "I  said  before,  and  I  forewarn." 
2%ose  who  heretofore  have  sinned ;   TrpoTjjxaprrjKoai,  to  tboao 


II.   CORINTHIANS    13,  3.  301 

who  sinned  before,  not  before  Paul's  second  visit,  but  those 
who  heretofore  have  sinned,  i.  e.  those  who  ah-eady  stand  in 
the  category  of  known  sinners,  and  to  all  other^  \.  e.  to  those 
who  were  not  thus  known,  who  had  not  as  yet  oftended.  If 
I  come  again  (ek  r6  TraXtv),  J  icill  not  spare.  Paul  had  for- 
borne long  enough,  and  he  was  now  determined  to  try  the 
effect  of  discipUne  on  those  whom  his  arguments  and  exhorta- 
tions failed  to  render  obedient.  From  this,  as  wou  as  from 
other  passages  of  Paul's  epistles,  two  things  are  abundantly 
manifest.  First,  the  right  of  excommunication  in  the  church. 
It  is  only  in  established  churches  controlled  by  the  state,  or 
thoroughly  imbued  with  Erastian  principles,  that  this  right  ia 
seriously  questioned,  or  its  exercise  precluded.  In  his  former 
epistle,  chap.  5,  the  apostle  had  enjoined  on  the  Corinthians 
the  duty  of  casting  out  of  their  communion  those  who  openly 
violated  the  law  of  Christ.  The  second  thing  here  rendered 
manifest,  is,  that  the  apostle  as  an  individual  possessed  the 
right  of  excommunication.  The  apostolic  churches  were  not 
independent  democratic  communities,  vested  with  supreme 
authority  over  their  own  members.  Paul  could  cast  out  of 
their  communion  whom  he  would.  He  w^as  indeed  clothed 
with  supernatural  power  Avhich  enabled  him  to  deliver  offend- 
ers "  unto  Satan  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh,"  1  Cor.  5,  5, 
but  this  was  not  all.  This  presupposed  the  power  of  excom- 
munication. It  was  the  ability  miraculously  to  punish  with 
corporeal  evils  those  whom  he  cut  off  from  the  church.  This 
right  to  discipline,  as  it  is  not  to  be  merged  into  the  super- 
natural gift  just  referred  to,  so  it  is  not  to  be  referred  to  the 
inspiration  and  consequent  infalhbility  of  the  apostles.  The 
apostles  w^ere  infallible  as  teachers,  but  not  as  men  or  as  dis- 
ciplinarians. They  received  unrenewed  men  into  the  church, 
as  in  the  case  of  Simon  Magus.  They  did  not  pretend  to  read 
the  heart,  much  less  to  be  omniscient.  Paul  proposed  to  ar- 
rive at  the  knowledge  of  offences  by  judicial  examination. 
He  avowed  his  purpose  to  condemn  no  one  on  his  own  judg- 
ment or  knowledge,  but  only  on  the  testimony  of  two  or  three 
witnesses.  This  right  to  exercise  discipline  which  Paul 
claimed  was  not  founded  on  his  miraculous  gifts,  but  on  his 
ministerial  office. 


3.  Since  ye  seek  a  proof  of  Christ  speaking  in  me, 
which  to  you-ward  is  not  weak,  but  is  mightv  in  you. 


302  II.   CORINTHIANS   13,4. 

This  is  part  of  the  sentence  bes^iin  in  v.  2.  'I  will  not 
spare  since  ye  seek  a  proof  of  Christ  speaking  in  me.'  01s- 
hausen  saj^s  the  sense  of  the  context  is,  '  Since  they  wished  to 
put  the  apostle  to  the  test  and  see  whether  Christ  was  in  him, 
they  had  better  try  themselves  and  see  whether  Christ  was  in 
thern.  If  Christ  was  in  them,  they  would  recognize  the  power 
of  God  in  the  apostle's  weakness.'  This  supposes  v.  4  to  be  a 
parenthesis,  and  connects  cTret  SoKLfjir]v  tprjT^lre  of  v.  3,  with  eav 
rou?  SoKLfxa^ere  of  V.  5.  But  this  is  arbitrary  and  unnatural,  aa 
it  is  unnecessary,  there  being  no  indication  of  want  of  conti- 
nuity in  the  connection.  A  proof  of  Christ,  may  mean,  '  a 
proof  which  Christ  gives,'  or,  '  a  proof  that  Christ  speaks  in 
me.'  De  Wette  and  Meyer  prefer  the  former,  on  account  of 
the  following,  '  who  is  not  weak,'  which  agrees  better  with 
the  assumption  that  Xpwrrov  is  the  genitive  of  the  subject. 
'  Since  ye  seek  a  proof  or  manifestation  of  Christ  who  speaks 
in  me,  who  is  not  weak.'  Calvin's  idea  is  that  it  was  not 
Paul,  but  Christ,  that  the  Corinthians  were  questioning.  "  It 
is  Christ  who  speaks  in  me ;  when  therefore  you  question  my 
doctrine,  it  is  not  me,  but  him  whom  you  offend."  He  refers 
to  Num.  16,  11,  where  murmuring  against  Moses  and  Aaron 
is  represented  as  murmuring  against  God.  Compare  also 
Isaiah  7, 13.  The  common  interpretation,  however,  is  more 
in  keeping  with  the  drift  of  the  whole  context.  What  the 
false  teachers  and  their  adherents  denied,  was  Paul's  apostle- 
ship;  what  they  demanded  was  proof  that  Christ  spoke  in 
him,  or  that  he  was  a  messenger  of  Christ.  Since  the  evi- 
dence which  he  had  already  given  in  word  and  deed  had  not 
satisfied  them,  he  was  about  to  give  them  a  proof  which  they 
would  find  it  difficult  to  resist.  Who  is  7iot  weak  as  concerns 
you,  but  is  mighty  among  you.  The  messenger  and  organ 
of  Christ  was  not  to  be  rejected  or  offended  with  impunity, 
since  Christ  was  not  weak,  but  powerful.  His  power  had 
been  proved  among  them  not  only  in  the  conversion  of  multi- 
tudes, but  by  signs  and  wonders,  and  by  divers  manifestations 
of  omnipotence. 

4.  For  though  he  was  crucified  through  weakness, 
yet  he  Uveth  by  the  power  of  God.  For  we  also  are 
weak  in  him,  but  we  shall  live  with  him  by  the  power 
of  God  toward  you. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   13,  4.  303 

Christ  is  divinely  powerful,  for  though  he  died  as  a  man, 
he  lives  as  God.  He  had  a  feeble  human  nature,  but  also  an 
omnipotent  divine  nature.  So  we  his  apostles,  though  in  one 
aspect  weak,  in  another  are  strong.  We  are  associated  with 
Christ  both  in  his  weakness  and  in  his  power ;  in  his  deatl. 
and  in  his  life.  For  though.  The  text  is  doubtful.  The 
common  edition  has  kcCi  yap  ei,  for  even  if  which  the  Yulgate 
renders  etsi  and  the  English  version  although.,  taking  koi  el 
(even  if)  as  equivalent  to  ei  Kat,  if  even.  Many  MSS.  and 
editors  omit  the  d.  The  sense  then  is,  *  For  he  was  even  cru- 
cified through  weakness.'  The  common  text  gives  a  clear 
meaning,  '  For  even  if  he  were  crucified  through  weakness.' 
The  case  is  hypothetically  presented.  Through  weakness,  c/c 
do-^evcia?.  His  weakness  was  the  cause  or  necessary  condition 
and  evidence  of  his  death ;  not  of  course  as  implying  that  his 
death  was  not  voluntary,  for  our  Lord  said  he  laid  down  his 
life  of  himself;  but  the  assumption  of  a  weak  human  nature 
liable  to  death,  was  of  course  necessary,  in  order  that  the 
eternal  Son  of  God  should  be  capable  of  death.  Comp.  Phil. 
2,  9.  Heb.  2,  14,  15.  His  death,  therefore,  was  the  evidence 
of  weakness,  in  the  sense  of  having  a  weak,  or  mortal  nature. 
Yet  he  liveth  by  the  power  of  God.  The  same  person  who 
died,  now  lives.  That  complex  person,  having  a  perfect  hu- 
man and  a  true  divine  nature  hypostatically  united,  rose  from 
the  dead,  and  lives  forever,  and  therefore  can  manifest  the  di- 
vine power  which  the  apostle  attributed  to  him.  The  resur- 
rection of  Christ  is  sometimes  referred  to  God,  as  in  Rom.  6, 
4.  Eph.  1,  20.  Phil.  2,  9 ;  sometimes  to  himself,  as  in  Matt. 
26,  61.  Mark  14,  58.  John  2,  19.  10,  18.  This  is  done  on  the 
same  principle  that  the  works  of  creation  and  providence  are 
referred  sometimes  to  the  Father  and  sometimes  to  the  Son. 
That  principle  is  the  unity  of  the  divine  nature,  or  the  identity 
of  the  persons  of  the  Trinity  as  to  essence.  They  are  the 
same  in  substance,  and  therefore  the  works  ad  extra  of  the 
one  are  the  works  of  the  others  also.  It  is  not,  however,  the 
fact  that  the  resurrection  of  Christ  was  eflected  by  the  powei 
of  God,  but  the  fact  that  he  is  now  alive  and  clothed  with 
divine  power,  that  the  apostle  urges  as  pertinent  to  his  object. 
For  we  also.,  &c.  The  connection  of  this  clause  may  be  with 
the  immediately  preceding  one,  '  Christ  liveth  by  the  power 
of  God,  for  we  live.'  The  life  which  the  apostle  possessed 
and  manifested  being  derived  from  Christ,  was  proof  that 
Christ  still  lived.     Or  the  connection  is  with  the  close  of  th© 


304  II.   CORINTHIANS   13,  4. 

preceding  verse.  *  Christ  is  powerful  among  you,  1.  Becaust 
though  he  died  as  a  man,  he  lives ;  and  2.  Because  though  we 
are  weak,  we  are  strong  in  him.'  In  either  way  the  sense  is 
substantially  the  same.  In  what  sense  does  the  apostle  here 
speak  of  himself  as  weak  ?  It  is  not  a  moral  weakness,  for  it 
is  conditioned  by  his  communion  with  Christ ;  we  are  weak 
in  him.  It  is  not  subjection  to  those  sufferings  which  were  a 
proof  of  weakness  and  are  therefore  called  infirmities ;  be- 
cause the  context  does  not  call  for  any  reference  to  the  apos- 
tle's sufferings.  Nor  does  it  mean  a  weakness  in  the  estima- 
tion of  others,  i.  e.  that  he  was  despised.  It  is  obviously 
antithetical  to  the  strength  or  power  of  which  he  was  a 
partaker ;  and  as  the  power  which  he  threatened  to  exercise 
and  demonstrate  was  the  power  to  punish,  so  the  weakness 
of  which  he  speaks  was  the  absence  of  the  manifestation  of 
that  power.  He  in  Christ,  that  is,  in  virtue  of  his  fellowship 
with  Christ,  was  when  in  Corinth  weak  and  forbearing,  as 
though  he  had  no  power  to  vindicate  his  authority ;  just  as 
Christ  was  weak  in  the  hands  of  his  enemies  Avhen  they  led 
him  away  to  be  crucified.  But  as  Christ's  weakness  was 
voluntary,  as  there  rested  latent  in  the  suffering  Lamb  of  God 
the  resources  of  almighty  power ;  so  in  the  meek,  forbearing 
apostle  was  the  plenitude  of  supernatural  power  which  he  de- 
rived from  his  ascended  master.  TFe  shall  live  icith  him. 
"Vitam,"  says  Calvin,  "opponit  intirmitati:  ideoque  hoc 
nomine  llorentem  et  plenum  dignitatis  statum  intelligit."  As 
the  life  of  Christ  subsequent  to  his  resurrection  was  a  state  in 
which  he  assumed  the  exercise  and  manifestation  of  the  power 
inherent  in  him  as  the  Son  of  God,  so  the  life  of  which  Paul 
here  speaks,  was  the  state  in  which  he  manifested  the  apostolic 
power  with  which  he  was  invested.  There  is  no  reference  to 
the  future  or  eternal  life  of  which  Paul,  as  a  believoa',  was  here- 
after to  partake.  He  is  vindicating  the  propriety  of  his  de- 
nunciation of  chastisement  to  the  disobedient  in  Corinth. 
Though  he  had  been  among  them  as  weak  and  forbearing, 
yet  he  would  manifest  that  he  was  alive  in  the  sense  of  having 
power  to  enforce  his  commands.  3y  the  power  of  God. 
Paul's  power  was  a  manifestation  of  the  power  of  God.  It 
was  derived  from  God.  It  was  not  his  own  either  in  its 
source  or  in  its  exercise.  He  could  do  nothing,  as  he  after- 
wards says,  against  the  truth.  Toicard  you  /  i.  e.  we  shall 
live  toward  you.  We  shall  exercise  our  authority,  or  manifest 
our  apostolic  life  and  power  in  relation  to  you. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   13,5.  303 

5.  Examine  yourselves,  whether  ye  be  in  the  faith ; 
prove  your  own  selves.  Know  ye  not  your  own  selves, 
how  that  Jesus  Christ  is  in  you,  except  ye  be  repro- 
bates ? 

There  are  two  links  of  association  between  this  verse  ana 
what  precedes.  They  had  been  trying  the  apostle,  seeking 
proof  of  Christ  speaking  in  him.  He  tells  them  they  had  bet- 
ter examine  themselves  and  see  whether  Christ  was  in  them. 
Hence  the  antithesis  between  eavrov?  (yourselves)  placed  be- 
fore the  verb  for  the  sake  of  emphasis,  and  BoKLfjirjv  ^T^retre  (ye 
seek  a  proof,  &c.)  of  v.  3.  '  Ye  would  prove  me — ^rove  your- 
selves.' Another  idea,  however,  and  perhaps  a  more  important 
one  is  this,  '  Ye  seek  a  proof  of  Christ  speaking  in  me,  seek  it 
in  yourselves.  Know  ye  not  that  Christ  is  in  you  (unless  you 
be  reprobates),  and  if  he  is  in  you,  if  you  are  really  members 
of  his  body,  ye  will  know  that  he  is  in  me.'  The  passage  in 
this  view  is  analogous  to  those  in  which  the  apostle  appeals  to 
the  people  as  seals  of  his  ministry,  1  Cor.  9,  1,  and  as  his  let- 
ters of  commendation,  3,  2.  To  exainine  and  to  prove  mean 
the  same  thing.  Both  express  the  idea  of  trying  or  putting 
to  the  test  to  ascertain  the  nature  or  character  of  the  person 
or  thing  tried.  Whether  ye  be  m  the  faith^  that  is,  vv^h ether 
you  really  have  faith,  or  are  Christians  only  in  name.  This 
exhortation  to  self-examination  supposes,  on  the  one  hand, 
that  faith  is  self-manifesting,  that  it  reveals  itself  in  the  con- 
sciousness and  by  its  fruits ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  it 
may  exist  and  be  genuine  and  yet  not  be  kno\vn  as  true  faith 
by  the  believer  himself.  Only  what  is  doubtful  needs  to  be 
determined  by  examination.  The  fact,  therefore,  that  we  are 
commanded  to  examine  ourselves  to  see  whether  we  are  in 
the  faith,  proves  that  a  true  believer  may  doubt  of  his  good 
estate.  In  other  words,  it  proves  that  assurance  is  not  essen- 
tial to  faith.  Calvin,  in  his  antagonism  to  the  Romish  doc- 
trine that  assurance  is  unattainable  in  this  life,  and  that  all 
claims  to  it  are  unscriptural  and  fanatical,  draws  the  directly 
opposite  conclusion  from  this  passage.  Hie  locus,  he  says, 
valet  ad  probandam  fidei  certitudinem,  quam  nobis_  Sorbonici 
sophistae  labefactarunt,  imo  penitus  exterminarunt  exhominum 
animis;  temeritatis  damnant,  quotquot  persuasi  sunt  se  esse 
Christi  membra,  et  ilium  habere  in  se  manentem ;  nam  morali 
quam  vocant^  conjectura,  hoc  est,  sola  ojDinione  contentos  esse 


3e6  II.   CORINTHIANS   13,  5. 

nos  jubent,  ut  conscientiae  perpetuo  suspenses  htereant  ao 
perplexae.  Quid  autem  hie  Paulus?  reprobos  esse  testatur 
quiciinque  dubiiant  an  possideaiit  Christum,  et  sint  ex  illius 
corpore.  Quare  sit  nobis  haec  sola  recta  fides,  quaB  facit  ut 
tuto,  neque  dubia  opinione,  sed  stabiH  constantique  certitudi- 
ne,  in  gratia  Dei  acquiescamus.  Elsewhere,  however,  Calvin 
teaches  a  different  doctrine,  in  so  far  as  he  admits  that  true 
believers  are  often  disturbed  by  serious  doubts  and  inward 
conflicts.  See  his  Institutes,  Lib.  iii.  cap.  ii.  17,  and  Lib.  iv. 
cap.  xiv.  7.  8, 

Know  ye  not  your  oicn  selves  how  that  Christ  is  m  you. 
This  version  overlooks  the  connecting  particle  rj  (or),  the  force 
of  which  indeed  it  is  not  easy  to  see.  It  may  be  that  the 
apostle  designed  in  these  words  to  shame  or  to  rouse  them. 
*  Examine  yourselves,  or  are  you  so  besotted  or  ignorant  as 
not  to  know  that  Christ  is  in  you ;  that  some  thing  is  to  be 
discovered  by  self-examination,  unless  ye  are  no  Christians  at 
all.'  It  may,  however,  be  a  direct  appeal  to  the  consciousness 
of  his  readers.  '  Do  you  not  recognize  in  yourselves,  that  is, 
are  ye  not  conscious,  that  Christ  is  in  you.'  The  construction 
in  this  clause  is  analogous  to  that  in  1  Cor.  14,  37  and  16,  15. 
'Know  yourselves  that,  &c.,'  equivalent  to  'know  that.' 
Winer  63,  3.  The  expression  Christ  is  in  you^  does  not  mean 
'  Christ  is  among  you  as  a  people.'  It  refers  to  an  indwelling 
of  Christ  in  the  individual  believer,  as  is  plain  from  such  pas- 
sages as  Gal.  2,  20,  "Christ  liveth  in  me,"  and  Gal.  4,  19. 
Rom.  8,  10.  Christ  dwells  in  his  people  by  his  Spirit.  The 
presence  of  the  Spirit  is  the  presence  of  Christ.  This  is  not  a 
mere  figurative  expression,  as  when  we  say  we  have  a  friend 
in  our  heart — but  a  real  truth.  The  Spirit  of  Christ,  the  Holy 
Ghost,  is  in  the  people  of  God  collectively  and  individually, 
the  ever-present  source  of  a  new  kind  of  life,  so  that  if  any 
man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ  he  is  none  of  his.  Rom.  8,  9. 
Unless  ye  be  reprobates.  The  word  reprobate^  in  its  theologi- 
cal sense,  means  one  who  is  judicially  abandoned  to  e^•erlast- 
ing  perdition.  Such  is  obviously  not  its  sense  here,  otherwise 
all  those  not  now  converted  would  perish  forever.  The  word 
is  to  be  taken  in  its  ordinary  meaning,  disapproved,,  unworthy 
of  approbation.  Any  person  or  thing  which  cannot  stand  the 
test  is  dSoKi/xos.  Those  therefore  in  whom  Christ  docs  not 
dwell  cannot  stand  the  test,  and  are  proved  to  be  Christians, 
if  at  all,  only  in  name. 


II.   CORINTHIANS   13,  6.  7.  307 

6.  But  I  trust  that  ye  shaU  know  that  we  are  not 
reprobates. 

In  V.  3  Paul  had  said  that  the  Corinthians  sought  SoKifx-^v 
(evidence)  that  Christ  was  in  him  as  an  apostle.  He  exhorted 
them  to  seek  evidence  that  he  was  in  them  as  believers.  If 
they  should  prove  to  be  (dSo/ct/zoq)  without  evidence,  he  was 
satisfied  that  they  would  find  that  he  was  not  aSd/ct^os.  The 
SoKt/xrj  (or  evidence)  of  Christ  speaking  in  him  which  he  pro- 
posed or  threatened  to  give,  was  the  exercise  of  the  apostolic 
power  which  resulted  from  the  indwelling  of  Christ,  and  there- 
fore proved  his  presence.  He  was  loath,  however,  to  give 
that  e\ddence ;  he  would  rather  be  (dSoKi/^tos)  without  that 
evidence ;  and  he  therefore  adds, 

7.  Now  I  pray  to  God  that  ye  do  no  evil;  not  that 
we  should  appear  approved,  but  that  ye  should  do  that 
which  is  honest,  though  we  be  as  reprobates. 

N'ow  I  pray  God  that  ye  do  no  evil ;  that  is,  I  pray  that 
ye  may  not  give  occasion  for  me  to  give  the  evidence  of  Christ 
speaking  in  me,  which  I  have  threatened  to  give,  in  case  of 
your  continued  disobedience.  So  far  from  desiring  an  oppor- 
tunity of  exhibiting  my  supernatural  power,  I  earnestly  desire 
that  there  may  be  no  occasion  for  its  exercise.  The  interpre- 
tation which  Grotius,  and  after  him  Flatt,  Billroth,  and  others 
give  of  this  clause,  '  I  pray  God  that  I  may  do  you  no  evil,'  is 
possible  so  far  as  the  words  are  concerned,  as  Trot^o-at  v/xas 
Ka/cdv  may  mean  either,  to  do  you  evil^  or,  that  you  do  evil. 
But  to  do  evil  is  not  to  punish.  And  had  Paul  intended  to 
say,  '  I  pray  God  that  I  may  not  punish  you,'  he  certainly 
would  have  chosen  some  more  suitable  expression.  Besides, 
TTotrycrat  KaKov  is  the  opposite  of  TToi^Tc  TO  KaXov  {ye  may  do 
right)  in  this  same  verse.  Not  that  we  should  appear  ap* 
prroved^  &c.  This  and  the  following  clause  give  the  reason 
of  the  prayer  just  uttered.  The  negative  statement  of  that 
reason  comes  first.  He  did  not  desire  their  good  estate  for 
the  selfish  reason  that  he  might  appear,  i.  e.  stand  forth  ap- 
parent, as  SoKLfxo^p  (approved),  as  one  concerning  whom  there 
could  be  no  doubt  that  Christ  dwelt  in  him.  There  were  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  evidence  of  the  validity  of  Paul's  claims  as  a 
believer  and  as  an  apostle  ;  his  holy  life  and  multiform  labours ; 
iigns  and  wonders ;  the  apostolic  power  with  which  he  waa 


308  II.   CORINTHIANS   13 


clothed  ;  his  success  in  preaching,  or  the  number  and  charao« 
ter  of  his  converts.  The  good  state  of  the  Corinthian  church 
was  therefore  an  evidence  that  he  was  approved,  i.  e.  could 
stand  the  test.  This,  however,  as  he  says,  was  not  the  reason 
why  he  prayed  that  tliey  might  do  no  evil.  That  reason,  as 
stated  positively,  was,  that  ye  should  do  that  ichich  is  honest. 
That  is,  it  was  their  good,  and  not  his  own  recognition,  that 
he  had  at  heart.  Do  lohat  is  honesty  to  kciXov  TroLrJTe^  that  ye 
may  do  the  good,  the  beautiful,  Avhat  is  at  once  right  and 
I)leasing.  Though  we  he  as  reprobates^  dSsKi/xoc,  without  ap- 
probation, Paul  was  earnestly  desirous  that  the  Corinthians 
should  do  what  was  right,  although  the  consequence  Avas  that 
he  should  have  no  opportunity  of  giving  that  Soki/xt^v  (evi- 
dence) of  Christ  speaking  in  him  which  he  had  threatened  to 
give,  and  thus,  in  that  respect,  be  dSoKtyxos,  icithout  evidence. 
There  is  such  a  play  on  words  in  this  whole  connection  that 
the  sense  of  the  passage  is  much  plainer  in  the  Greek  than  it 
is  in  the  English  version.  This  viev/  of  the  passage  is  simple 
and  suited  to  the  connection,  and  is  commonly  adopted. 
Calvin  and  others  interpret  it  more  generally  and  without 
specific  reference  to  the  connection.  "Concerning  myself," 
he  makes  the  aj^ostle  say,  "I  am  not  solicitous;  I  only  fear 
lest  ye  should  offend  God.  I  am  ready  to  appear  as  repro- 
bate, if  you  are  free  of  offence.  Reprobate,  I  mean,  in  the 
judgment  of  men,  who  often  reject  those  who  are  worthy  of 
special  honour."  This  is  the  general  sense,  but  the  peculiar 
colouring  of  the  passage  is  thus  lost. 

8.  For  we  can  do  nothing  against  the  truth,  but 
for  the  truth. 

This  verse  is  connected  with  the  last  clause  of  the  preced- 
ing. 'We  shall,  in  one  sense,  be  uSoKi/xot  (without  evidence) 
if  you  do  what  is  right,  for  we  can  do  nothing  against  the 
truth,  but  are  powerful  only  for  the  truth.'  That  is,  '  We  can 
exercise  the  apostolic  and  supernatural  ])ower  which  is  the 
evidence  of  Christ  speaking  in  us,  only  in  behalf  of  the  truth.' 
]5y  the  trutli  is  not  to  be  understood  moral  excellence,  or  rec- 
titude— a  sense  indeed  which  the  word  dXr/^cta  often  has  when 
antithetical  to  unrighteousness;  nor  does  it  mean  judicial  rec- 
titude specifically,  i.  e.  that  standard  to  which  a  judge  should 
be  conformed,  or,  as  Bengel  explains  it,  "  the  exact  authority 
to  be  exercised  over  the  Corinthians ; "  but  it  means  truth  in 


II.   CORINTHIAISrS    13,  9.  10.  300 

its  religious,  scriptural  sense ;  that  revelation  which  God  hag 
made  in  his  word  as  the  rule  of  our  fliith  and  practice.  This 
passage  is  of  special  interest  as  fixing  the  limits  of  all  ecclesi- 
astical power,  whether  ordinary  or  mii-aculous.  The  decision 
of  the  apostle,  if  against  the  truth,  availed  nothing  in  the  sight 
of  God ;  the  supernatural  power  with  Avhich  he  was  invested 
forsook  his  arm,  if  raised  against  God's  own  people.  The 
promise  of  our  Lord,  that  what  the  church  binds  on  earth 
shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  is  limited  by  the  condition  that  her 
decisions  be  in  accordance  with  the  truth.  The  doctrine  of 
the  extreme  Romish  party  that  acts  of  discipline  are  effectual 
in  cutting  off  from  the  true  church  and  the  communion  of 
God,  even  clave  errante^  i.  e.  when  the  church  errs  in  her 
knowledge  of  the  facts,  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  Paul's 
doctrine.     He  claimed  no  such  power. 


9.  For  we  are  glad,  when  we  are  weak,  and  ye  are 
strong :  and  this  also  we  wish,  (even)  your  perfection. 

If  connected  with  the  preceding  clause  the  sense  of  this 
verse  is,  '  We  can  act  only  for  the  truth,  for  we  have  no  de- 
sire to  exercise  our  power  to  punish ;  we  are  glad  when  we  are 
weak.'  The  meaning  is  better  if  this  verse  is  regarded  as  co- 
ordinate with  verse  8,  and  subordinate  to  v.  7.  '  We  desire 
that  you  should  do  right,  though  we  appear  as  dSoKt/Aot  (with- 
out evidence),  for  we  are  glad  when  we  are  weak.'  That  is, 
we  are  glad  when  we  have  no  occasion  to  exercise  or  manifest 
our  power  to  punish.  This  is  evidently  the  sense  in  which  the 
word  loeak  is  to  be  here  taken.  It  does  not  mean  weak  in 
the  estimation  of  men,  that  is,  despised  as  unworthy  of  respect. 
And  ye  are  strong^  i.  e.  such  as  cannot  be  overcome.  They 
were  strong  when  they  were  good.  Their  goodness  was  a 
sure  protection  from  the  disciplinary  power  of  the  apostle. 
This  also  we  wish,  viz.  your  perfection.  That  il5,  we  are  not 
only  glad  when  you  are  strong,  but  we  pray  for  your  complete 
establishment.  Perfection,  KaTdpTLcn<;,  from  KaTapri^w,  in  the 
sense  to  put  in  complete  order.  Paul  prayed  that  they  might 
be  perfectly  restored  from  the  state  of  confusion,  contention, 
and  evil  into  which  they  had  fallen. 

10.  Therefore  I  write  t-hese  things  being  absent. 


810  II.   CORINTHIANS   13,  10. 

lest  being  present  I  should  use  sharpness,  according  to 
the  power  which  the  Lord  hath  given  me  to  edification, 
and  not  to  destruction. 

Therefore^  i.  e.  because  I  desire  your  good,  and  because  I 
prefer  to  appear  d8oKi/u.o9,  icithout  proofs  so  far  as  the  proof  of 
iny  a])ostleship  consists  in  the  exercise  of  my  power  to  punish. 
This  is  the  i-eason  why  the  apostle  wrote  these  exhortations 
and  warnings,  lest  being  present  I  should  use  sharpness^  i.  e. 
be  obliged  to  exercise  severity  in  dealing  with  offenders. 
The  expression  is  dTrord/Acos  ^(pria-wixaL^  where  v/xtv  must  be  sup- 
plied, 'lest  I  should  use  you  sharply.'  Accordt?ig  to  the 
2:>oicer.  The  word  is  t^ovo-tW,  w^hich  includes  the  ideas  of 
ability  and  authority  or  right.  Paul  was  invested  both  with 
tlie  authority  to  punish  offenders  and  with  the  power  to  carry 
his  judgments  into  effect.  Which  the  Lord  hath  given  me. 
His  authority  was  not  self-assumed,  and  his  power  was  not 
derived  from  himself  They  were  the  gifts  of  the  Lord,  the 
only  source  of  either  in  the  church.  The  Lord  is  of  course 
Clirist,  whose  divine  power  and  omnipresence  are  taken  for 
granted.  Paul  everywhere  as  much  assumes  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  is  invested  with  divine  attributes  and  entitled  to  divine 
worship,  as  God  himself  Nothing  can  be  more  foreign  to 
the  whole  spirit  of  the  New  Testament  than  the  idea,  that 
Christ,  having  finished  his  work  on  earth  as  a  teacher  and 
witness,  has  passed  away  so  as  to  be  no  longer  present  with 
liis  people.  The  whole  Scriptures,  on  the  contrary,  assume 
that  he  is  everywhere  present  in  knowledge  and  power,  the 
source  of  all  grace,  strength  and  consolation,  the  object  of  the 
religious  affections,  and  of  the  acts  of  religious  worship.  For 
edification^  and  not  for  destruction.  This  not  only  expresses 
the  design  with  which  Paul  was  invested  and  endowed  with 
apostolic  power,  but  it  teaches  that  the  power  itself  could  be 
exercised  only  for  good.  Christ  would  not  sanction  an  unjust 
decision,  or  clothe  the  arm  of  man  with  supernatural  power  to 
inflict  unmerited  punishment.  The  apostles  could  not  strike 
a  saint  with  blindness  nor  deliver  a  child  of  God  unto  Satan, 
The  church  and  its  ministers  are  in  the  same  predicament  still. 
They  are  ])Owerful  only  for  good.  Their  mistaken  decisions 
or  unrighteous  judgments  are  of  no  avail.  They  affect  the 
btanding  of  tlie  true  believer  in  the  sight  of  God  no  more 
than  tlie  judgments  of  the  Jewish  synagogues  when  they  cast 
out  the  early  disciples  as  evil.     Truth  and  holiness  are  a  sure 


II.   OORINTniANS   13,  11.  811 

defence  against  all  ecclesiastical  power.     No  one  can  harm  us, 
if  we  be  followers  of  that  which  is  good.     1  Peter  3,  13. 

11.  Finally,  brethren,  farewell.  Be  perfect,  be  of 
good  comfort,  be  of  one  mind,  live  in  peace ;  and  the 
God  of  love  and  peace  shall  be  with  you. 

The  severe  rebukes  contained  in  the  preceding  chapters, 
are  softened  down  by  the  parental  and  apostolic  tone  assumed 
';i  these  concluding  verses.  He  addresses  them  as  brethren, 
members  of  the  family  of  God  and  of  the  body  of  Christ. 
Farewell^  ^atpere;  hterally,  rejoice^  ^^'ijoy  to  you.  It  is  used 
often  in  salutations,  as  Hail !  On  account  of  what  follows  it 
is  better  to  take  it  as  an  exhortation  to  spiritual  joy.  Rejoice^ 
i.  e.  in  the  Lord.  In  Phil.  3,  1  and  4,  4  we  have  the  same  63^- 
hortation,  x^^ipere  kv  Kvptio.  Joy  in  redemption,  rejoicing  in 
our  union  and  communion  with  the  Lord  is  one  of  our  highest 
duties.  Blessings  so  infinite  as  these  should  not  be  received 
with  indifference.  Joy  is  the  atmosphere  of  heaven,  and  the 
more  we  have  of  it  on  earth,  the  more  heavenly  shall  we  be 
m  character  and  temper.  I^e  perfect^  Kaprl^ea^e,  reform  your- 
selves ;  correct  the  evils  which  prevail  within  and  among  you. 
i5e  of  good  comfort,,  TrapaKaXeTo-^e,  which  may  be  rendered, 
exhort  one  another.  This  latter  interpretation  is  perhaps 
preferable,  because  more  distinct  from  the  p^'eceding  com- 
mand. The  exhortation  to  rejoice  includes  that  to  be  of  good 
comlbrt.  Be  of  one  mind,,  to  avro  (ppovdre,  be  united  in  faith 
in  feeling,  and  in  object.  Cognate  with  this  is  the  exhorta- 
tion, JLive  171  peace.  One  of  the  greatest  evils  prevailing  in 
Corinth,  as  we  learn  from  1  Cor.  1,  10-12,  was  the  contention? 
of  the  various  parties  into  which  the  church  was  divided. 
And  the  God  of  love  and  peace,,  i.  e.  God  is  the  author  of  love 
and  of  peace,  shall  he  with  you.  The  existence  of  love  and 
peace  is  the  condition  of  the  presence  of  the  God  of  peace. 
He  withdraws  the  manifestations  of  his  presence  from  the  soul 
disturbed  by  angry  passions,  and  from  a  community  torn  by 
dissensions.  "We  have  here  the  familiar  Christian  paradox. 
God's  presence  produces  love  and  peace,  and  we  must  have 
love  and  peace  in  order  to  have  his  presence.  God  gives 
what  he  commands.  God  gives,  but  we  must  cherish  his 
gifts.  His  agency  does  not  supersede  ours,  but  mingles  with 
it  and  becomes  one  with  it  in  our  consciousness.  We  work 
li 


513  II.   CORINTHIANS    13,  12.  13. 

out  our  own  salvation,  while  God  works  in  us.  Our  duty  is 
to  yield  ourselves  to  the  ojDeration  of  God,  and  to  exert  onr 
faculties  as  though  the  effect  desired  were  in  our  own  pcnver, 
and  leave  to  his  almighty,  mystic  co-operation  its  own  gra- 
cious office.  The  man  with  the  withered  hand,  did  s^.mie- 
thing  when  he  stretched  it  forth,  although  the  power  to  move 
was  divinely  given.  It  is  vain  for  us  to  pray  for  the  presence 
of  the  God  of  love  ahcl  peace,  unless  we  strive  to  free  our 
hearts  from  all  evil  passions.  Shall  be  with  you  ;  shall  mani« 
fest  his  presence,  his  glory  and  his  love.  This  gives  perfect 
peace,  and  fills  the  soul  with  joy  unspeakable  and  full  of  ^loi-y. 
It  is  the  restoration  of  the  original  and  normal  relation  be- 
tween God  and  the  soul,  and  secures  at  once  its  purification 
and  blessedness.  He  who  has  the  presence  of  God  cai>  feel 
no  want. 

12.  Greet  one  another  with  a  holy  kiss. 

The  kiss  w^as  the  expression  of  fellowship  and  affection. 
It  w^as  and  is  in  the  East  the  common  mode  of  salutation 
among  friends.  A  holy  kiss,  is  a  kiss  which  expresses  Chris- 
tian communion  and  love.  It  was  the  usage  in  Christian  as- 
semblies for  the  men  to  kiss  the  minister  and  each  other, 
especially  at  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  supper.  It  did  not 
go  out  of  use  in  the  Western  churches  until  about  the  thir- 
teenth centur}^,  and  is  still  observed  among  some  eastern 
sects.  It  is  not  a  command  of  perpetual  obligation,  as  the 
spirit  of  the  command  is  that  Christians  should  express  their 
mutual  love  in  the  way  sanctioned  by  the  age  and  community 
in  which  they  live. 

13.  All  the  saints  salute  you. 

The  saints,  in  scriptural  usage,  are  not  those  who  are 
complete  in  glory,  but  believers,  separated  from  the  world, 
consecrated  to  God,  and  inwardly  purified.  This  term,  there- 
fore, expresses  the  character  and  the  relations,  not  of  a  class 
among  God's  people,  but  of  the  disciples  of  Christ  as  such. 
They  are  all,  if  sincere,  separated  from  the  world,  distin- 
guished from  men  of  the  world  as  to  their  objects  of  desire 
and  pursuit,  and  as  to  the  rules  by  which  they  are  governed ; 
they  are  consecrated  to  the  service  and  w^orship  of  God,  as  a 
holy  people ;  and  they  are  cleansed  from  the  guilt  and  con- 


11.   CORINTHIANS   13,  14.  813 

trolling  power  of  sin.  They  are  therefore  iDonnd  to  live  ia 
accordance  with  this  character.  All  the  saints,  i.  e.  all  those 
in  th*^  place  in  which  Paul  then  was.  The  communion  of 
saints  includes  all  believers  Avho  feel  themselves  to  be  one 
body  in  Christ.  Salute  vou,  that  is,  wish  you  salvation,  which 
includes  all  good. 

14.  The  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
(be)  with  you  all.     Amen. 

This  comprehensive  benediction  closes  the  epistle.  It  in- 
cludes all  the  benefits  of  redemption.  First,  the  grace,  or  fa- 
voicr,  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  the  theanthropical 
designation  of  our  blessed  Saviour.  It  includes  or  indicates 
his  divine  nature,  he  is  our  Lord ;  his  human  nature,  he  is  Je- 
sus ;  his  office,  he  is  the  Christ,  the  Messiah,  the  long-promised 
Redeemer.  It  is  the  favour,  the  unmerited  love  and  all  that 
springs  from  it,  of  this  divine  person  clothed  in  our  nature,  and 
who  as  the  theanthropos  is  invested  with  the  office  of  Messiah, 
the  headship  over  his  own  people  and  all  power  in  heaven  and 
earth,  that  the  apostle  invokes  for  all  his  believing  readers. 
Every  one  feels  that  this  is  precisely  what  he,  as  a  guilty,  pol- 
luted, helpless  sinner,  needs.  K  this  glorious,  mysteriously 
constituted,  exalted  Saviour,  Sou  of  God  and  Son  of  man, 
makes  us  the  objects  of  his  favour,  then  is  our  present  security 
and  ultimate  salvation  rendered  certain.  ITie  love  of  God. 
In  one  view  the  love  of  God  is  the  source  of  redemption. 
God  manifested  his  love  in  giving  his  Son  for  us,  Rom.  5,  8. 
But  in  another  view  the  love  of  God  to  us  is  due  to  the  grace 
and  work  of  Christ.  That  is,  the  manifestation  of  that  love 
in  the  pardon,  sanctification  and  salvation  of  men,  v^-as  con- 
ditional on  the  work  of  Christ.  We  are  reconciled  to  God 
by  the  death  of  his  Son.  His  death  as  a  satisfaction  for  our 
»i'4is  was  necessary  in  order  to  our  being  actually  introduced 
into  the  fellowship  of  God  and  made  partakers  of  his  love. 
Therefore  the  apostle  puts  the  grace  of  Christ  before  the  love 
of  God,  as,  in  the  sense  mentioned,  the  necessary  condition  of 
its  manifestation.  And  the  co7nmu?iio?i  (Kotvwvia,  the  partici- 
pation) of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  primary  object  of  the  death 
of  Christ  was  the  communication  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  re- 
deemed us  from  the  curse  of  the  law  that  we  might  receive 


flU  II.   CORINTHIANS   18,  14. 

the  protnise  of  the  Spirit,  Gal.  3,  13.  14.  It  is  the  gift  of  tho 
Holy  Ghost  secured  in  the  covenant  of  redemption  by  the 
death  of  Christ  that  applies  to  us  the  benefits  of  his  mediation. 
As  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  secured  to  all  the  people  of  God, 
they  are  kolvwvoi,  joint  partakers,  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
thereby  made  one  body.  This  is  the  ground  of  the  commu- 
nion of  saints  in  which  the  church  universal  professes  her  faith. 
The  distinct  j->ersonality  and  the  divinity  of  the  Son,  the 
Father,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  each  of  whom  prayer  is  ad- 
dressed, is  here  taken  for  granted.  And  therefore  this  pas- 
sage  is  a  clear  recognition  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  which 
is  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  Christianity  For  a  Christian 
is  one  who  seeks  and  enjoys  the  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  thi 
love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


DATE  DUE 


JAIWKP 


Mnv>  y  "flW" 


INTEO  IN  U.S. 


